SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " good " 4,261 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Unpacking Q1 Earnings: Accel Entertainment (NYSE:ACEL) In The Context Of Other Consumer Discretionary
The end of the earnings season is always a good time to take a step back and see who shined (and who didn’t). Let’s take a look at how consumer discretionary - gaming solutions stocks fared in Q1, starting with Accel Entertainment (NYSE:ACEL).
Richard Feynman’s 50-Year-Old 'Restaurant Problem' Finally Decoded. It Shows Why People Settle for Good Enough
The restaurant problem reveals why human shortcuts can work surprisingly well.
Final Fantasy 14 receives first Nintendo Switch 2 gameplay trailer
We now have a good look at Final Fantasy 14 on Nintendo Switch 2 with a proper gameplay trailer. Square Enix announced a port of the game at the end of April during the Fan Festival. However, we didn’t really get a look at the Nintendo Switch 2 version at all. A few seconds of footage did appear during yesterday’...
Crown family’s Richard C. Goodman sells Oak Street condo
Goodman, who has been a managing partner of the Crown family’s investment firm, bought the condominium in 2013.
Trump’s AI fund idea is good politics, but bad economics
Plans to share the gains from technology could cause more problems than they solve
When is rare good news on climate science actually bad? When News Corp misrepresents it
The worst-case scenario for a high-emissions scenario has been revised downward – but the best-case option is now implausible
I went into Halo: Campaign Evolved thinking it didn't need to exist, but after playing two levels I want full remakes of the original trilogy and Reach
Alright, fine. Halo: Campaign Evolved is good, actually, and all my doubts about the remake of the remake have been quashed. For now.
Archetype Entertainment founder and BioWare veteran wishes Exodus didn't look so much like Mass Effect
But he thinks the team is doing a "good job" moving it further away from BioWare's sci-fi romp.
Sports help athlete with allergies, asthma breathe easier
Ethan Good has dealt with severe asthma and allergies since age 2. With help from Sanford Health, now he's playing hockey and baseball.
MLB trends: Red Sox's home woes, how Giants lost the Patrick Bailey trade and a bargain free agent making good
Let's check in around the league as the summer drags on
Joe Burrow gives a health update
Bengals quarterback feeling good during OTA’s
New OMB rule could break science in the United States
The drug that saved your mother. The treatment your doctor recommended. The clinical trial that bought someone you love more time. None of it was inevitable. It required a system built to operate outside politics and sustained over decades, because science doesn’t operate on the timeline of a politician. That system is now under direct threat. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has proposed a new rule to regulate all federal grants, not just science, but housing, education, defense, NASA and everything in between, that would fundamentally change how research is conducted in the United States. There have been a lot of fires in the past 16 months, and if everything is an emergency, nothing is an emergency. But this is a very big deal. These rules would strip away the independence that has kept science from becoming a political tool. The good news is there’s still something we can all do. How the grant system was designed to work When I was a new faculty member, I was full of millions of ideas, so I sat down and wrote an NIH proposal. I worked on it for months and thought it was so good. Then I sent it to my mentor. It came back covered in comments. Places where my reasoning wasn’t as airtight as I’d thought, methods that could be stronger, gaps in my thinking that I had been too close to the work to see. It stung, as honest feedback always does, but peer review almost always makes the work better. In fact, it’s the backbone of how American science has functioned for generations. At NIH, submitted proposals go to a panel of scientists who have experience in the field. These are the people who can read research methods and spot their weaknesses, who understand when an experiment is designed well and when it isn’t. Applications are scored rigorously, and often only the top 3-20% of proposals receive funding. The people making funding decisions are required to justify them based on these reviews. To be clear: this is not a perfect system, and good science still goes unfunded more often than any of us would like due to limited resources. There is also criticism that peer review may undervalue bold ideas that are risky but could have high payoffs. But the peer review system is nonetheless a meaningful part of the grant selection process. While thoughtful and careful changes could improve the system, the changes being proposed by OMB will not make things better. The rule that could change everything Through this OMB proposal, the system that helps decide what gets funded is being dismantled. There are many troubling elements buried in this proposal, but three provisions stand out in particular. Each would be damaging alone. Together, they would change what kind of science gets done in America, and who it serves. 1. Political appointees would decide which science gets funded, and peer review would be explicitly sidelined or ignored. The guidelines your doctor follows, the standards that determine what’s in your air and water, the drugs that get approved for your family: all of it starts with a funding decision. Right now, that decision is made by scientists who can evaluate whether the work is actually sound and whether it could move the needle forward. Under this proposal, funding decisions could be made by political appointees. The careful, expertise-driven review process that shapes grant funding would be effectively sidelined. That means that a poorly designed study could get funded simply because someone in a political office liked the sound of it, while rigorous, important work doesn’t get funded because it no longer aligns with the administration’s priorities. In other words, critical work that benefits all of us could now be missed just because it has become politically inconvenient. 2. Grants could be canceled at any point, without warning, in the middle of ongoing work. Say your tax dollars have been paying for a cancer study for two years. The grant was awarded for five years, so the team is mid-experiment. There are three additional years’ worth of answers that could change how the disease is treated for hundreds of thousands of people. With this new rule, the federal government could cancel the remaining funding tomorrow, walk away from the commitment it made with your money, and have no legal obligation to finish what it started. This is a huge waste of money. There are rarely other sources of funding for this work, which means the team, the graduate students, postdocs, and research staff who have dedicated years of their careers to this project could lose their jobs. Patients who have contributed their time to studies may not see it turn into useful learnings for others. Every hour of work already completed could result in nothing useful. Science can take decades to get to tangible outcomes. It needs a stable funding system to flourish. 3. Researchers would have a harder time communicating their findings without pre-approval from the federal government. There is a saying from Sir Mark Walport: “Science isn’t finished until it’s communicated.” Science is no use to anyone if it is kept locked away in the labs that produced the data. The proposed rule could make communicating research findings harder in a number of ways: Make it harder for scientists to widely share their findings in scientific journals. Publication costs, including journal fees that allow for broad public access, could not be paid for by federal funds which is often how scientists pay these costs. Restrict researchers from engaging publicly about how their findings should inform policy or public health guidelines. This would restrict scientists from doing the work that transforms years of lab work into decisions that actually affect people’s lives. Make it harder for scientists to attend conferences. Conferences would now need to be approved by the federal agency at the time of grant award. This disadvantages conferences or publications that are not politically aligned. Conferences are a key way in which scientists learn about work happening in their field so they can collaborate and build on each other’s findings. What good is science with a muzzle? The long-term impact These changes could (and hopefully would) be reversed under the next administration. But by then, damage has been done. Once projects are halted or denied funding by political appointees, people leave their science careers for other paths or even leave the country to do their amazing science elsewhere. You cannot pause a scientific study the way you pause a subscription you decided isn’t useful anymore. You cannot freeze a research team that depends on salaries to feed their families, causing a scramble for replacement funding that, in most cases, simply does not exist. When the money stops, everything stops, and all the work in progress and its potential are lost. Despite all of the language about reducing waste, fraud, and abuse, this new proposed rule increases the administrative burden tremendously. Every researcher watching this unfold will make a rational decision: don’t start anything that will take a decade to finish. This includes not building a team around funding that could vanish, or asking the big questions that need patience and stability to answer. The most consequential science, the kind that produces the treatments and the breakthroughs that reach your doctor’s office twenty years from now, is exactly the science that would be abandoned first. This is still a proposal, so we can all do something Some worry this rule is already a done deal. But by law, OMB is required to open a public comment period. Those comments matter because they inform members of Congress, they can be used in litigation, and they create a public record. So here’s what you can do: Submit a public comment. The public comment period on this proposed change is open until July 13. Anyone can submit a comment, and OMB is required to respond to substantial ones. Each comment must be different to count as distinct; identical comments will be counted only once. Comment as an individual, not on behalf of your organization. Here’s a full resource to help you, with useful examples, but in general: Share a story about how science or federal funding has benefitted you or is involved in your work. Are you or someone you loved a cancer survivor? Do you know someone with Alzheimer’s? Have you received NIH/NSF or other federal funding? All of these can be stories you use to highlight why you care. Explain why you’re worried about these proposed changes. You can use the wording found here or in other resources to help you. Ask them to withdraw this proposed rule. Contact your elected representatives. Congress allocates money to federal agencies to spend, and it has oversight of how that process works. You can let your representatives know this proposed change concerns you and ask them to intervene. There are levers they can push that can help at this moment. Let others know why federal funding matters. This isn’t just about science, but ALL federal grants, including for education systems, defense projects, and more. The process, including the importance of federal funding, is invisible to many. We can all make it more visible by sharing how science benefits us and why we value it. You can also share this article, or any of the resources linked here, to help spread awareness! Bottom line We are quickly losing ground in scientific research in the U.S. More changes, like the proposed rule by OMB, would decimate our ability to conduct research here, leaving us all worse off: fewer treatments for pancreatic cancer, less research on pollution impacts, fewer answers for patients with rare disease, and more unaddressed health needs. The impact will be very real for all of us, regardless of where we stand politically. Using our voices for science is more important than ever. Love, LM Big thanks to Dr. Megan Ranney for reading this over and providing brilliant insights, as always. Dr. Liz Marnik, PhD, is Executive Director of The Evidence Collective at YLE and a science communicator and immunologist working at the intersection of public trust, science, and public health. You can find her on Substack, LinkedIn, Instagram and Threads. Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE) comprises a team of experts, ranging from physicians to immunologists to epidemiologists to nutritionists, working together with one goal: to “Translate” ever-evolving public health science so that people are well-equipped to make evidence-based decisions. The YLE suite of newsletters reaches over 475,000 people across more than 132 countries. This newsletter is free to everyone, thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support the effort, subscribe or upgrade below: Subscribe
An Austin nonprofit wants to help food workers get health insurance
Good Work Austin's pilot program helped 25 food service workers get free health insurance this year. The organization's executive director wants to bring the benefit to more people in 2027.
Pate lauds new Iowa law targeting fake business filings
Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate says a new state law is a good first step to address scammers using an actual Iowa address when filling out online forms to register the name of a fake business. “What they’re doing to these poor homeowners is now setting them up for concern about what liabilities they […]
Yankees news: Good news on Austin Wells
Austin Wells receives promising MRI results; an All-Star prediction; Yesavage starting Friday for Jays
Understanding the exposome
The world around us influences our health in countless ways. New tools and approaches are helping scientists measure our environmental exposures—both good and bad—on a large scale in the hopes of improving prevention and treatment strategies.
Reflecting On Media & Entertainment Stocks’ Q4 Earnings: EchoStar (NASDAQ:SATS)
Quarterly earnings results are a good time to check in on a company’s progress, especially compared to its peers in the same sector. Today we are looking at EchoStar (NASDAQ:SATS) and the best and worst performers in the media & entertainment industry.
Opinion | The Good That Can Come From Platner’s Candidacy
The Senate race in Maine is a chance to do away with inconsistent standards applied according to political bias.
Tom Brady's new drink has a name even he won't say
Tom Brady and Gopuff are launching a coconut water brand, betting on the growing demand for healthier hydration options.
Is There a Business Case for Closing Fitting Rooms?
Brandy Melville has reportedly closed its fitting rooms, joining a growing list that includes Sainsbury’s, Tesco, and Goodwill. Critics fear it will increase returns — and waste.
macOS 27 Golden Gate makes it clear when apps are sneakily running in background
Google Gemini for macOS was recently flagged for not being a very good app citizen on the Mac. Apple’s new...
Apple dials down Liquid Glass, and the Mac looks way better for it
Less Liquid Glass is good Liquid Glass.
Owners of older iPhones just got some good news
Apple announced at WWDC that giving iPhones as old as the iPhone 11 a CPU scheduler "will make older iPhones feel even more responsive."
We can create the future of science right now
Paul Litvak is the founder and Executive Director of the Robyn Dawes Institute and a Visiting Scholar at UC Berkeley. He has a PhD in Behavioral Decision Research from Carnegie Mellon where he studied emotions and the sunk cost bias. Over 15 years in industry, he solved a wide range of challenging technical problems. At Meta he created models optimizing the ad review process. At Google he ran experiments to measure social influence. At Airbnb, he was a product manager leading machine learning teams optimizing search ranking and price suggestions. He also co-founded and led product at Rhythmic Health, a venture-backed biosensing startup, creating an accurate low cost system using a color changing strip and a smart phone to measure salivary lactate. The bottleneck At this point, it is uncontroversial to say that science needs to stop using the PDF article as the unit of knowledge and currency. The unbearable slowness of scientific publishing, the profit motive and margins: I’m not saying anything new. The PDF also sucks because it’s hard to extract structured information, which makes it hard to do evidence synthesis. As a result, we do much less evidence synthesis than is needed. And evidence synthesis ultimately undergirds most policy and medical decision-making. I can see second-by-second real-time odds for any sporting or newsworthy event, but a school board can’t see the best evidence on whether their 8th graders should be taught algebra. As a society, we don’t treat this as an important problem. Again, not controversial. Not only is the problem well understood, but the solution has already been laid out. What we need is AI-assisted living evidence synthesis - (1) an open knowledge graph of atomic claims, (2) claims linked to evidence, (3) assessment and synthesis of each piece of evidence, and (4) continuous updating with new data. What few realize (yet) is that the technical capacity to build this vision for a significant portion of science already exists. Not only that, scientists and startup teams are already building many of these components. I know this because I’ve been surveying the space and talking to many of the builders. There are some missing pieces: for example, evaluations of how well some of the components work. But at this point, most of what’s missing is a fully end-to-end working integration of all of these parts. In the rest of this essay, I’m going to lay out all the parts of a working living evidence layer for science and who is working on them, and propose concrete next steps for building this system. What’s now possible The diagram above outlines the components of a living evidence synthesis platform, including some of the teams working on each component1. Scientific PDFs are processed into claims with associated evidence. The evidence is subjected to a forensic audit, methodological evaluation and robustness and reproducibility checks. Finally it’s given a weight in a continuously updating synthesis. What follows is a description and status of each component and a few of the teams working on them. Document understanding The first thing you need to be able to do is turn an article into structured data. Mostly that means parsing PDFs. There are often multicolumn layouts that confuse non-specialized PDF to text processing libraries. For scientific papers, there is the added complexity of parsing formulas and tables and figures. This is a really hot area - there are startups offering APIs, and it seems like a new open source package gets posted to Github every few weeks. What follows isn’t exhaustive. A package called GROBID was the state of the art for a while, they didn’t update their package for nearly two years until very recently. In the meantime reducto.ai released an AI powered PDF extraction API, PaddleOCR became popular, IBM released a model called Docling, and both Mistral and Gemini created models and libraries. I also know of at least one other well-funded psychology research group working on a paper parser. By contrast, there are few open evals in this space, with no extensive evals for complex table comprehension in particular. Nonetheless, I’m confident this will be a solved problem soon, given the combination of LLM advances and developer interest. Hypothesis level extraction There has been increasing interest in comprehending the extracted text of papers and linking information to evidence for each hypothesis. A lot of work has already been done. Trialstreamer (Marshall et al. 2020) and RobotReviewer LIVE (Marshall et al. 2023) demonstrated automated extraction of trial population, intervention, and outcome at scale on clinical RCTs. PaperQA2 (Skarlinski et al. 2024) and Ai2 ScholarQA (2024) extended this to retrieval-augmented question answering with citation grounding. Elicit, Consensus, and SciSpace operationalized claim-level extraction for end users. OpenEval (Booeshaghi et al. 2026) is the most recent and most ambitious: 1.96 million atomic claims extracted from 16,087 eLife manuscripts using Claude Sonnet 4.5, grouped into ~299,000 results, with LLM evaluations showing 81% agreement with human peer review on a 2,487-paper subset. None of these solutions link claims to test-statistics, as you would need to evaluate randomized controlled trials. This is why I built the evidence.guide API - to extract hypotheses and associated test statistics from behavioral science papers. The best public eval of this kind of extraction I’m aware of comes from the recent SCORE project - they had humans code thousands of psychology papers to extract their claims by hand. It would be extremely helpful to the world if all scientific PDFs were available as structured open data. I’ve been working to make this happen, both directly at Berkeley and through coordination with large entities I can’t yet speak of; as hard as it is to do, I think it’s possible2. Forensic audit A lot of work has been done on forensic audit, but some gaps remain. Of course, for biology papers that rely on images for evidence, there are a variety of tools (notably Proofig and ImageTwin) to spot anomalies. These are still well short of what sleuths like Elizabeth Bik can do on her own, but these tools are constant companions among fraud analysts. There’s someone working on auditing Excel files for anomalies, and a number of teams are automating numerical checks like GRIM and SPRITE, including Scrutiny project, the INSPECT-SR team as well as statcheck. The regcheck team is building a way to use AI to compare preregistrations to analyses in papers, to ensure there aren’t significant deviations. Nonetheless, there are many other kinds of anomalies to screen for, both public and less publicly known. And there are no formal evals for anomaly detection that I’m aware of. Still, there’s a lot to draw from in this space and I’m pretty certain we will be able to scan papers for most kinds of obvious anomalies in the near future. Methodological review This area has been white hot, though I fear for many of the startups in this space, because this capability may become commoditized. There are at least six different AI peer review companies, including Refine.ink, Reviewer3, ReviewerZero.ai, Q.E.D. Science, Paper Wizard, and Isitcredible. Coarse (a pun on refine) was also recently created as an open source alternative. These systems provide qualitative feedback on the content of papers, spotting methodological weaknesses and mathematical errors. They seem to work pretty well, and many academics report bitterly that they exceed the average quality of typical peer reviewers. But there are few evals here either. What evals exist so far involve using LLM-as-judge (circularity problems abound) or comparing against human reviews of questionable quality. What you’d ideally want is an eval that measures capturing known errors in papers3. Reproducibility and robustness Another active area has been using AI agents to automate computational reproducibility4 and robustness5 checks in papers that report numerical results. For more recent papers where data and code are available, AI agents can see whether they can re-run the analyses and produce the numbers reported in the published paper. In addition to a handful of individual academics who have been experimenting using Claude Code for this, the Institute for Replication is a leading group working on building an end to end system. The evals related to this problem are the most mature, with CORE-Bench (Siegel, Kapoor, Narayanan 2024) and PaperBench (OpenAI 2025) available to benchmark agents on this task. There is also work on getting AI agents to test alternative ways of analyzing the data to ensure the results are robust to small analytic design choices. Synthesis This is the most underdeveloped area where significant investment is required. Although some automated evidence synthesis systems exist — for example, otto-sr is building an AI agent to write systematic reviews — none of these incorporate the full range of paper level signals to weight evidence appropriately. Nor is there anything like an eval or a gold standard for a good systematic review. Arguably Cochrane reviews are the closest we have to gold standard human systematic reviews, though I’ve heard academics in the know complain about their uneven quality. A key question for a synthesis platform is how to weight anomalies and methodological issues in assessing the quality of a piece of evidence. This is an unsolved problem and one I’m very keen to work on. Continuous updating There are many pieces of basic infrastructure available for monitoring for new research and initiating updates. OpenAlex is the current open citation graph. Retraction Watch integrated into Crossref in October 2023. Scite tracks how citations support, contrast, or mention prior claims. The Living Evidence Network demonstrated continuous-update workflows in clinical guidelines. Engineering this is a relatively straightforward task. When you look over this technical architecture and all the progress being made, it’s hard not to be optimistic that a living guide to scientific evidence will be built. The stakeholders are ready The social infrastructure for this is starting to coalesce — it’s not just a pie in the sky academic exercise to imagine this coming into existence. Institutions like the Center for Open Science, the Institute for Replication, the INSPECT-SR, the Living Evidence Network and more are all working on scaling work to improve research quality. Funders are also aligned. The Sloan Foundation has funded living evidence work through COS. Coefficient Giving supports the Institute for Replication and COS. The Astera Institute and the Institute for Progress have shown interest in this space. NIH has established an Office for Replication and Reproducibility. Although there are (very unfortunately) serious headwinds in science funding generally, there is an active group of funders interested in metascience. A brief word about what I’ve been doing at RDI. First, as a Visiting Scholar at Berkeley I’ve been actively figuring out how a non-profit and a public university can conduct and make public the results of large-scale academic article data mining. With some of the money I raised from donors, I commissioned a legal analysis of recent case law and publisher text data mining (TDM) agreements in order to understand whether a massive open data mining of academic articles is possible (with caveats, it is). I’ve also been working to bring together stakeholders in this space, and identify gaps. I’ve also been doing some software development in this space, with more to come. A pilot proposal The assumption undergirding all of this is that an AI, given all this information, would make the right judgment about a scientific claim with lots of conflicting evidence, weighing all the factors appropriately. That’s the hypothesis we need to test. Randomized control trial research is the best place to focus on first. RCTs are used to make many of the important decisions in society - from medical trials to public policy changes. And they use a relatively uniform set of inferential statistics with lots of known and available diagnostics. Behavioral science experiments, within the broader realm of RCTs, should be first used as a testbed whose results can be generalized. Because behavioral science is at the vanguard of open science practices, replications abound (there are thousands of them) to serve as ground truth training data. Key Hypothesis Therefore the pilot would test, in behavioral RCTs that have been replicated, whether the quality of evidence for a claim can be used to accurately predict whether that claim will replicate. Secondary Hypotheses Compared to claims that replicated, non-replicated claims demonstrate a greater share of forensic anomalies in their source literatures. Hypothesis level claim and statistic extraction is accurate enough to scale living evidence without onerous human review costs. Replication prediction is more accurate than prediction markets6 or journal prestige. If all the different quality signals we gather do accurately predict which studies will replicate, then we can use that model to score evidence to power the living evidence layer. Why this is informative regardless of outcome If the pilot succeeds, the architecture extends to medical RCTs (where Living Evidence already operates and integration is mostly about claim representation), then to slices of basic biology with stable replication structure. If it fails, the field learns which quality signals are load-bearing and which ones metascience has oversold. Either result is a contribution to knowing what the literature supports. Implications for funders Because this burgeoning ecosystem of builders already exists, a well-informed philanthropic or government funder could play a crucial catalyzing role in bringing this future about. They could play at least three roles: creating open structured datasets, publishing open benchmarks and incentivizing the solving of key technical challenges. First, open archives of papers that the government maintains, like PubMed, could be turned into structured data amenable to large scale metascience and claim aggregation. I know the US government already has an interest in doing this, though some key open questions remain unanswered. How do you determine the best models and systems for accurately extracting information from papers? How can you establish a robust way to allow researchers to flag errors and correct them? And finally, how do you create a legal regime in working with publishers to maximize the scope of available papers? For the latter, a university or a private philanthropy may be better positioned to make structured data publicly available under journal subscription terms or fair use. Philanthropists or government funders could also coordinate to create or commission benchmarks that evaluate whether important problems have been solved. For example, an open benchmark for claim extraction from a range of different scientific article types would be extremely helpful. Ensuring the underlying data are accurate is vital for creating these evaluations. I’ve discussed opportunistically using various human-created datasets for this purpose, but a consistent problem is that errors in human data make it difficult for them to serve as a gold standard. Finally, with structured data and benchmarks available, the government or private philanthropy could use them to incentivize groups to develop machine learning systems that meet these benchmarks. Prizes are one potentially valuable tool for this. For example, you could establish a prize for a system that accurately updates a living meta-analysis for a small set of claims. Prizes are particularly useful as signals of problem importance, and can help create vibrant ecosystems of public and private research—see, for example the role the government played in kickstarting the current work on nuclear fusion. Conclusion The drawbacks of the current scientific publishing system are known. Scientists agree, metascientists agree, philanthropists agree: the published PDF plus citation graph isn’t the right substrate for maintaining a representation of the evidence base in science. The pieces needed to build the alternative either already exist or are rapidly taking shape. The community is forming around exactly this problem, with concrete partnerships and shared infrastructure. A pilot should start on behavioral science RCTs because that’s the slice of empirical science most amenable to legibility, where replication ground truth is richest, and where the failure modes are best documented. What’s been missing is the galvanizing mission to assemble these pieces into something that works. That’s what I’m proposing to build. *** 1 I have a broader field map that I’ll release publicly soon. This is me, building in public! 2 If this is something that you are excited about, please reach out and talk to me. 3 More on this very soon too! 4 This tests whether, given the code and the data, you can get the same statistics as reported in the published paper. 5 This tests whether the results are the same as a paper’s given alternative analytical decisions in conducting the analysis (like outlier omission). Closely related is the idea of a “multiverse” where you come up with many different ways of answering the same underlying research question with the same data, and test whether the results hold in all those alternative methods. There’s been work on the latter as well. 6 Some of the replications, e.g. those from the SCORE project, had paired the experiments with forecasts from prediction markets. So we get to look at this for free.
Google's AI Plus plan drops to $4.99 and doubles storage to 400GB, making premium AI finally worth it
It's a good time to give it a try
'I think everyone wants to strive for bigger things'
Leeds United captain Ethan Ampadu believes he represents the "hard-working" people of the city and is looking to lead the club forward, after extending his stay at Elland Road until 2030. "I feel like me and Leeds have been a good fit so far," Ampadu said. Leeds avoided the dreaded 'yo-yo' effect last season as they managed to stay in the Premier League after being promoted from the Championship, and Ampadu says his decision to sign a new deal is partly because the club's hierarchy want to "develop and grow".
Opinion | Why repealing Minneapolis’ bathhouse ban could be a public health win
"History has shown multiple times how invocations of a particular concept of morality can be weaponized against queer people with ramifications on public health and civic good," two professors write.
New York businesses cash in as Knicks' historic NBA Finals run sparks economic boom
Former Modell's Sporting Goods CEO Mitch Modell joins 'Varney & Co.' to discuss how the Knicks' NBA Finals run is fueling a major economic boost for New York City businesses.
An incredible sports week ahead, plus RIP Stacey King
The Pulse Newsletter 📣 | This is The Athletic’s daily sports newsletter. Sign up here to receive The Pulse directly in your inbox. Good morning! What a week ahead. Coming up: 🫨 MSG frenzy 🎾 Zverev’s breakthrough 🙏 Beloved broadcaster dies To prepare for this week, I kept looking at the calendar and vacillating between stressed and pumped. Wow, there are so many big games. Amazing, right? But also … so much to care about. Yay? So this might be more of a personal exercise, but I think it can benefit us all. A guidebook to the week ahead, which is one of the most...
Summer may ease pressures on youth, but it's a good time to address mental health concerns
Getting teens treatment during the break can set them up for success when school returns and anxiety spikes.
The American Family Is at a Breaking Point. Our Politics Have Finally Noticed.
Society has treated parenting as a private endeavor. But what if raising children is also a public good?
What To Expect From Academy Sports’s (ASO) Q1 Earnings
Sporting goods retailer Academy Sports & Outdoor (NASDAQ:ASO) will be announcing earnings results this Tuesday morning. Here’s what to expect.
Kin Health Raises $9 Million in Seed Funding
Armed with a recent $9 million seed funding raise, Westwood-based Kin Health Technologies Inc. is now trying to make good on its promise as a
State of Decay 3: Answering the Biggest Questions After the First Gameplay Reveal
Today at XBOX Games Showcase 2026, we got our first-ever look at gameplay for Undead Labs’ State of Decay 3 with their brand-new trailer, showing everything from open world exploration, multiplayer, settlement building, weapon crafting, and of course, some good old-fashioned zombie slaying.
Is Universal Health Services, Inc. (UHS) A Good Stock To Buy Now?
Is UHS a good stock to buy? We came across a bullish thesis on Universal Health Services, Inc. on r/ValueInvesting by Dynaheir-be. In this article, we will summarize the bulls’ thesis on UHS. Universal Health Services, Inc.’s share was trading at $150.12 as of May 28th. UHS’s trailing and forward P/E were 6.44 and 6.56 respectively according […]
5 health risks from consuming too much protein
Most Americans eat more protein than they need. We asked experts what can happen if people have too much of a good thing.
Dr. Andrew Parsons: Dr. ChatGPT is getting remarkably good at diagnosing health problems — but actual doctors are still better at weighing treatment options
A father is worried about his toddler, who has been running a fever for two days and pulling at one ear. A 65-year-old woman has been getting winded on her morning walks and feeling more fatigued than usual. Both reach for their phones and type their symptoms into an AI
Is Hims & Hers Health, Inc. (HIMS) A Good Stock To Buy Now?
Is HIMS a good stock to buy? We came across a bearish thesis on Hims & Hers Health, Inc. on Valueinvestorsclub.com by Pridwen. In this article, we will summarize the bears’ thesis on HIMS. Hims & Hers Health, Inc.’s share was trading at $27.51 as of June 2nd. HIMS’s trailing and forward P/E were 57.14 and 58.82 […]
Traveling reminds me of the wonders of home: Danny Heitman
A home misses you while you’re gone, which is a good thing, although the longing can take complicated forms.
Traveling reminds me of the wonders of home: Danny Heitman
A home misses you while you’re gone, which is a good thing, although the longing can take complicated forms.
AI is getting remarkably good at diagnosing health issues, but doctors are still better at weighing treatment options
Knowing what ails a patient is necessary but not sufficient for determining how to care for them. And how to manage a patient is a complex question.
Lincoln student photographer challenges health stereotypes
Poppy Bellamy wants her work to challenge the stereotype that "youth equates good health".
Gretchen N Miller
Scope of work: Miller co-chairs Greenberg Traurig’s products liability and mass torts practice, overseeing nearly 100 attorneys worldwide. She was recently named co-chair of the firm’s Chicago litigation practice, leading more than 50 attorneys.Significant case: She co-leads Albertsons’ defense in nationwide opioid litigation, challenging public nuisance claims, including a recent dismissal in Alaska. She secured summary judgment for Lockheed Martin in a groundwater contamination case involving 45 plaintiffs.Other contributions: Miller has held leadership roles in the Defense Research Institute, recently chairing the Products Liability Committee and winning its Outstanding Committee Chair Award, and is on the Good Sports Chicago advisory board.
Recruiting update (May 30-June 6)
From Saturday, May 30, to Saturday, June 6, the recruiting for class of 2027 has increased in size from seven to 14. Drew Aagesen Hailing from Goodrich, Michigan, Drew Aagesen pledged his commitment to the Cyclones on May 30. Though he was a versatile standout on both sides of the ball in high school, Iowa […]
Final Fantasy 7 Revelation: 22 New Screenshots Showcasing Its World, Combat, And More
It’s hard to believe, but after almost a decade, the Unknown Journey will conclude in Final Fantasy Revelation next year. Officially shown off at Summer Game Fest Live this week, Revelation is shaping up to be an exciting conclusion to the Final Fantasy 7 Remake saga, as well as a good-looking game on top of...
What are your all time favorite Russell Wilson plays?
Reminisce about the good Russell Wilson days!
The Good (and Concerning) from Bucs Minicamp
The Tampa Bay Buccaneers are showing some encouraging signs during offseason minicamp, but it's not all good news as they prepare for the 2026 NFL season.
Sports’ most depressing team, plus the Knicks take a 2-0 Finals lead
The Pulse Newsletter 📣 | This is The Athletic’s daily sports newsletter. Sign up here to receive The Pulse directly in your inbox. Good morning! At least the weather is nice in Orange County today. Coming up: 🫠 The hopeless Angels 🏀 Knicks in the driver’s seat 🎾 A historic title bid Has your team ever had the second-worst farm system in baseball, sat in last place, trailed 7-0 at home against a team that lost 119 games a year ago, and then gone down more when your right fielder missed a fly ball with his glove and volleyed it over the wall with his head for a home...
Drinking bone broth daily makes sense, but beware high sodium
Here’s what to know about what bone broth is, why it can be good for you and who needs to be careful about overdoing it.
Denver Broncos won’t hold joint practices this preseason
Unlike seasons’ past, the Denver Broncos won’t be holding any joint practices this preseason. Sean Payton has good reasons why:
Uber's AI training gig work offers good pay but lacks stability
Uber AI Solutions pays up to $150 an hour, contractors said. The AI training work doesn't involve onboarding and hours can vary from week to week.
Guruzeta, credit for an up-and-down season
Although things did not go well for Athletic as a team, Guruzeta delivered with 17 goals and a personal best.📸 Juan Manuel Serrano Arce - 2026 Getty ImagesIt has not been a good year for Athletic c...
Good Sports: Sanger High boys volleyball wins first state championship in school history
This year's Sanger Apaches Boys Volleyball team rose above the net to deliver something the school has never accomplished.
Sen. Jeff Merkley hosts Eugene roundtable on affordability with local businesses
With the cost of housing, goods and gas continuing to rise, Sen. Jeff Merkley hosted a roundtable discussion Friday in Eugene to talk affordability with small b
Smart people weigh in on Anthropic's AI pause proposal
"We believe it would be good for the world to have the option to slow or temporarily pause," two leading Anthropic officials wrote.
A bonobo’s make-believe tea party has scientists rethinking whether imagination belongs only to humans
Kanzi the bonobo's responses in a pretend tea-party experiment have scientists reconsidering how uniquely human imagination really is.
Wales 'not good enough' in Montenegro
Having been denied a second goal, Wales were left with red faces when Jasna Djokovic levelled late on.
Car crashes into business on Athens Square
City officials say Athens Police were immediately contacted, and first responders, nearby merchants, and other good Samaritans quickly stepped in to help.
New Elden Ring Footage Seemingly Showcases Switch 2 Performance, And It Looks Good
Nothing tarnished about this
Harvey Ward: With steady leadership, UF’s brightest days are ahead
'Our university and the hundreds of thousands of good people who love and depend on it deserve steady and excellent leadership.'
Blue Jays get good Dylan Cease injury news
Cease hasn't been out for too long so far.
This no-phones theater chain now asks visitors to order food by phone. The reviews aren’t good.
Alamo Drafthouse, which built its brand on a strict ‘no phones’ policy, is now asking patrons to use their devices to order from the menu.
The surprising science-backed reason being in nature makes you feel good
A new study suggests spending time in nature may boost body appreciation, self-compassion and overall life satisfaction.
The surprising science-backed reason being in nature makes you feel good
A new study suggests spending time in nature may boost body appreciation, self-compassion and overall life satisfaction.
AI Sycophancy Serving As A Gateway Diverting People Toward Using AI For Their Mental Health Advice
AI sycophancy is rising. It could be that AI sycophancy also prods users into seeking AI mental health advice, which can be good or bad. An AI Insider analysis and scoop.
Packers Give Christian Watson Massive Contract Extension
The Green Bay Packers reshuffled their wide receiver room this offseason, but Christian Watson isn't going anywhere. Is that good?
Large fire destroys Lapeer County business, visible for miles
Smoke could be seen as far as Davison from the fire that began around 4 p.m. Thursday, June 4, at Pallets N More off Shaw Road in Goodland Township, north of Imlay City.
Dalton Rushing Gets Public Support From Max Muncy Amid Scrutiny
Los Angeles Dodgers catcher Dalton Rushing has been in the spotlight for his fiery on-field persona, creating a good deal of headlines.
High Growth Tech Stocks In Asia Featuring Damai Entertainment Holdings And 2 Others
In recent weeks, Asian markets have been navigating a complex landscape influenced by global geopolitical developments and economic indicators. As investor sentiment remains buoyant with optimism surrounding AI and technology advancements, this article explores high-growth tech stocks in Asia, featuring companies like Damai Entertainment Holdings that are poised to capitalize on these trends. A good stock in this environment is one that demonstrates resilience through innovation and has the...
Here's how every California county voted for governor
We have a good picture of how each of the state's 58 counties voted.
Chris Olave’s potential contract extension just got more expensive
Not good news for the Saints, great news for Olave
The Good And Bad Of ‘Marathon’ Season 2 So Far
Bungie has launched Marathon season 2, which has some cool additions and changes, but other things that break the core loop of the game.
Is an Online Master’s Degree in AI a Good Idea?
A look at the real-world value of online graduate AI programs, combining hard data with firsthand experience of a big tech machine learning engineer
Morning Skate: Bounceback
Welcome back to another Thursday! The Stanley Cup Final began with an absolute heater of a 5-4 win for the Vegas Golden Knights. It had a little bit of everything; comebacks, players that we generally agree are good looking like they are in hell, questionable goaltending, and the bad guys winning, setting up tonight’s contest […]
The Knicks’ grimy Game 1 win, plus a World Cup retrospective
The Pulse Newsletter 📣 | This is The Athletic’s daily sports newsletter. Sign up here to receive The Pulse directly in your inbox. Good morning! Embrace the grime today. Coming up: 🗽 New York’s moxie 🌬️ Sabalenka’s collapse 👨🏻🦲 Wildest World Cup moments One thought raced through my head every time I watched a New York Knicks possession in the fourth quarter last night: These dudes are grimy. I mean that as a huge compliment. There’s grit, and then there’s grime. Every bucket, every rebound, every screen oozed difficulty, as if each player was...
Why Does Roast Chicken Taste So Good? Inside the Science Behind the Flavors We Love
When we cook our favorite meals, what happens to the carbo-hydrates, proteins and fats? I confess I am a less-than-average cook, but God loves a trier. I remember being about 23 years old and tryin…
Is the ‘Charlotte Way’ cracking? Business leaders worry about new direction
For decades, the so-called Charlotte Way has meant collegial government, deference to business leaders and a shared belief that growth is good for a world-class city. Now, after several less business-friendly votes by a new City Council, some leaders worry the Charlotte Way is cracking. Tony Mecia of the Charlotte Ledger joined WFAE Executive Editor Ely Portillo for our weekly segment BizWorthy.
Dan Bongino: I miss the good old fashioned political scandals
Fox News contributor Dan Bongino discusses Dr. Adam Hisham Hamawy’s New Jersey House primary victory and his past association with a top terrorist on ‘The Ingraham Angle.’
NASA Says Goodbye to its Longtime Mars MAVEN Mission
The space agency announced that the MAVEN spacecraft, which has circled Mars for more than a decade, is being decommissioned.
Donald Trump says Ron DeSantis would be 'very good' as Attorney General
Is America's Governor in the on-deck circle?
Alphabet's record-breaking $85B raise for Google's AI business is a helluva good signal
If Alphabet's record-breaking, $85 billion stock sale signals investor appetite for AI-related offerings, we can see that investors are ready to chow.
This Stock Has No Business Being This Good, and It Just Keeps Going
This aerospace giant reported strong first-quarter 2026 earnings, and there's more good news on tap.
How good can they be? Projecting the best- and worst-case outcomes for rookie QBs in 2026
From Fernando Mendoza's uphill climb to Drew Allar's ideal situation, the environment around each rookie QB may matter as much as the talent itself
Elections to top science bodies test Croatia’s gender equality in research
Croatia’s track-record on gender equality in science has been both questioned and lauded in recent months, following both bad and good news on the topic. On the one hand, a senior awards committee was announced without a single woman researcher included. On the other, the national science academy welcomed its first cohort of fellows with more women than men.Members of the committee, which gives national awards recognising scientific achievement, are proposed by the ministry of science and endorsed by the parliament. The current line-up does include a woman, but she is culture minister Nina Obuljen Koržinek rather than a researcher. Even then, she didn’t make it into the photograph released to announce the appointments on April 16. “The image speaks a thousand words,” says Tanja Rudež, a science journalist for Jutarnji List newspaper. “I am surprised that none of these men, all well-known scientists, saw a problem with the fact that there was not a single successful female scientist on the committee,” she told Science|Business.Ivan Đikić, a prominent Croatian biochemist based at Goethe University Medical School, commented on LinkedIn that the news illustrated a “sad truth” about the state of science in Croatia.“It [. . .] reveals a system where women, despite contributing a substantial share of high-quality, internationally competitive science, are systematically excluded from the very processes that determine recognition and influence,” he wrote. Some 60% of researchers in Croatia are women, according to the Croatian Bureau of Statistics, and they perform well in international competitions. For example, of the 12 European Research Council (ERC) grants awarded to Croatian researchers, seven went to women.“So how is it possible that decision-making bodies are still dominated by men over 60, while not a single female ERC laureate is involved in the selection process?” asked Đikić. “This is not a marginal oversight; it is a structural failure.” The ministry of science did not reply to a request for comment. The awards committee is not unusual. For example, a scientific advisory body announced by the ministry of demographics in April comprises 35 men and five women. The board of the Croatian Science Foundation, newly appointed by the parliament, is a little better, with five men and two women, but still unequal. “This is especially significant because such bodies do not merely distribute prestige. They shape research priorities, funding allocation and long-term scientific development,” Marija Lugarić, chair of the parliament’s committee on gender equality, told Science|Business. “Representation here matters not only symbolically, but materially.”Referring to the awards committee and the board of the science foundation, Lugarić says that while both bodies were appointed by parliament, neither met the minimum 40% gender balance threshold that Croatian law and EU guidelines expressly recommend for public bodies.Đikić wants to see EU institutions put pressure on the government to ensure basic standards of fairness, transparency and democratic governance in science policy are met. “Meaningful change will not come without pressure,” he wrote. “It must intensify both within Croatia and at the level of European institutions. Anything less undermines the credibility of Europe’s commitment to excellence and inclusion in science.”Rudež also underlined the importance of talking and writing about this topic, “because public opinion in Croatia does influence changes in the status and visibility of women in science.”The European Commission has not yet responded to a request for comment.Good news from the academyA more positive story came from the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts on 21 May, with the announcement of seven new women fellows and five men. This is the first time in the academy’s 165-year history that women have outnumbered men in a new intake.One of the new fellows, two-time ERC grantee Iva Tolić, credits the academy leadership with trying to be more modern and inclusive, representing the whole community better. “The academy is really aware that so far, before this election, there were very few women,” she told Science|Business. “So, they are actively trying to make this more equal.”Related articlesExplained: How the MSCA is close to achieving gender balanceCall for EU to leverage academic freedom in global talent raceRudež is more cautious, noting that despite the academy’s “breakthrough this year [. . .] it is still a predominantly male institution, with only 18% women.”This reflects a wider imbalance in Croatia’s research landscape. “The key levers of power in science are still in the hands of men,” she went on. “For example, all 14 rectors of private and public universities are men.”Similarly, Lugarić says a structural glass ceiling still exists in Croatian science, which is “most visible precisely where power is exercised.”She cites data from the Commission’s She Figures 2024 report, which shows that Croatia ranks second in the EU for gender equality in research and innovation overall, with an equality index of 79.6 out of 100. It is in the top five for women’s career advancement, participation in research; representation across all research sectors and for scientific publications.In stark contrast, it ranks second to last when it comes to women in decision-making positions in science. “This is not a coincidence,” Lugarić says. “It is a structural pattern.”Informal barriersThe persistent under-representation of women in the highest structures of Croatia’s academies, boards, award committees and leadership positions is not down to formal barriers, Lugarić says, but arises from more subtle obstacles such as “informal networks, persistent expectations regarding traditional gender roles and the unequal distribution of care responsibilities.”Tolić would like to see more support for young women in terms of affordable housing and child support, and higher salaries. Currently, she says, salaries in science stay low for the first 10-15 years, while housing and spaces in kindergarten are limited and expensive. “You have to work a lot, you get very little money, so it’s not great to have a family in this situation,” she says.But despite the challenges, Tolić is optimistic, saying that gender equality in research in Croatia is “definitely improving and going in the right direction.” The situation is particularly promising in biology, she adds, where most full professors, heads of department and deans of faculties are women. Lugarić, too, see the glass ceiling “very slowly, cracking,” and cites the academy election as an example that structural change is possible. Yet the situation in the national awards committee is a “stark reminder that without a conscious, systemic commitment to gender balance, progress will remain slow and uneven.”
The cult of objectivity has broken consciousness science
With 22 competing theories and no consensus in sight, the science of consciousness is lost. In this exclusive IAI interview, Berkeley psychedelics researcher and bestselling author of a new book on consciousness Michael Pollan insists that even though consciousness lies beyond traditional forms of scientific investigation, we should resist becoming dualists who see it as something radically different from ordinary stuff in the world. Instead, he makes the case for reimagining science itself: it must stop reaching for objective descriptions of physical reality, and instead embrace subjectivity as the indispensable core of all inquiry. Alasdair Craig: How did your experiences with psychedelics get you interested in consciousness?Michael Pollan: One of the things that happens on psychedelics is that they foreground consciousness. What formerly seemed perfectly transparent and ever present—and yet, non-existent, as water is to fish—suddenly you see it. The metaphor I use in the book is that psychedelics sponge the windscreen. Suddenly you realize: wow, there’s a windscreen, there is this phenomenon that’s mediating my relationship to reality. This is not an unusual realization on psychedelics. I think a lot of people are called to think about consciousness after psychedelic experiences. So that was the proximate inspiration for A World Appears: A Journey Into Consciousness (2026).And then there was a more specific way in which psychedelics influence the book. That was a particular experience I had on psilocybin. I had the sensation that the plants in my garden were conscious and returning my gaze, with their own point of view and agency, and I got curious as to how to evaluate an insight like that. I mean, what’s the truth quotient of insights you have on psychedelics? And I was reading William James—who, of course, wrote beautifully about mystical experience—and he said, we can’t judge the metaphysics here, but we should pay attention to two criteria: (1) How useful is it to think this is true? He was a pragmatist, of course. And (2) can we subject it to other ways of knowing to validate it? Because maybe we should treat these insights as hypotheses. And that’s kind of how I approach psychedelics, as a great generator of hypotheses, but they need to be tested against other ways of knowing. And so that led me down this long path exploring the science of plant intelligence and plant sentience.AC: I love your phrase, “smudging the windowpane of conscious experience.” So do you now start to think, actually, even when I’m not on psychedelics, I’m just seeing a screen all the time, which is not reality, but rather is my conscious experience, behind which reality is hidden?MP: Well, you know, not when I’m brushing my teeth and making breakfast! But yes, in meditation, certainly. I mean, one of the things you realize is that my experience happens to be this way now, but it could be another way. And many things can affect it. My morning coffee changes the screen in various ways, sharpens certain things.___The only tool we have to understand consciousness is consciousness.___There’s this wonderful metaphor in Aldous Huxley’s book, The Doors of Perception, where he thinks we channel consciousness, and that what the brain does is edit it, and there’s a reducing valve. And psychedelics open the reducing valve wider. I don’t know that I’m ready to buy into the idea that consciousness exists outside brains, but I do love that metaphor because there are times when you are more conscious than others. I know I’ve switched from window pane to valve, but you know, a camera aperture can open wider or narrower. And I do have a sense of that. I have a sense of when I’m being less conscious, and when I’m being more conscious, by which I mean, you know, more present, taking in more sensory information. So when you start thinking about consciousness as a matter of degree, that changes things also.I think when we scroll on social media, obviously, we’re conscious. But minimally so, because we don’t have to generate our own thoughts. We’re basically taking these little hits from other people and thinking their thoughts.The process of writing this book made me kind of relativize everyday consciousness as just one type, which is exactly what William James said. Normal consciousness is one type, separated by the flimsiest of screens from the other types.AC: If we stick with the metaphor of the smudge on the window that you get when you take psychedelics, it seems like we’re saying that consciousness has become like an object that you’re looking at, right? You’re looking at the smudge and that just is consciousness. But sometimes we’ll talk about consciousness as a state that you’re in, rather than an object you can perceive. You’re either conscious or you’re not conscious. So it’s difficult to really know what sort of thing we’re talking about when we talk about consciousness, right?MP: Yeah. When you say that consciousness is an object, what’s the subject? Consciousness also? The only tool we have to understand consciousness is consciousness. So we’re in a closed loop and when we get a perspective on consciousness, we’re not achieving any distance from it. That’s one of the problems with studying consciousness. Science is predicated on an objective, God’s eye view of things, and you never get that. There’s no such thing. SUGGESTED VIEWING The brain filters consciousness With Àlex Gómez-Marín But, yeah, there is this sense, I think, that consciousness is something you can approach. Certainly, when you’re writing and trying to recreate a conscious experience, it’s a fiction, but you’re standing back from it, and looking at it. But there’s no real subject-object distinction.AC: That’s so interesting, because when philosophers start talking about consciousness, they often talk about what they call “qualia”, which is their word for the felt experience of, say, the color red. And I think that way of speaking often makes us think of the qualia as an object, which you can see out there: the redness of red. But, as you say, we also want to collapse the subject-object distinction when we talk about consciousness. So there’s something strange going on here…MP: Oh, yeah, there are many strange things going on! *AC: Let’s talk about the varieties of consciousness. Apart from perceptions, there are, pains, emotions, thoughts, and so on. What is it that holds all this diversity together so that they all count as instances of consciousness? What is it that they all have in common?MP: Yeah, that’s a really good question. I mean, there is sensory information, right? Which we perceive coming from the world outside ourselves. And then there’s internal information, which is what’s called interoception. And this is very important too. This is where feelings come from—what are sometimes called homeostatic feelings—that are intended to get the brain to keep us in these narrow ranges of temperature and glucose and so on. That’s a very important part of consciousness. And according to some researchers, who I think are probably right, this is where consciousness begins, with these very primal feelings, like hunger and thirst and warmth and itch, and things like that. And then there’s this third thing, which is our thinking about thinking.And what holds all this together is, I think, the sense of self. Consciousness generates a self: it is probably an organizing principle. All this stuff is happening to the self. It’s a construct, I think, but it is very useful. It can connect all these different streams of consciousness to a single being or a place, metaphorically speaking.* AC: The first half of your book is about the science of consciousness. Is consciousness just another thing, like black holes or the origin of life, which we don’t yet understand, but which we should have every hope that science will one day get to the bottom of, or is there something special about consciousness that makes this unlikely?MP: It depends how you define science. As we define science now, it’s going be very difficult. Science since Galileo has had a set of rules or assumptions, which is that the proper remit of science is to deal with the objective, quantifiable, third-person world. And the physical sciences have done amazing work under that set of limitations. Galileo—for tactical reasons, not for philosophical reasons—said science should not deal with the soul, which at the time was what consciousness was considered to be. So what is subjective, what is qualitative, what is first person, we’re going to leave to the church, he said. And this was a good agreement, and it probably kept many scientists from getting burned at the stake. But it leaves science in an awkward spot, now that it wants to venture into that territory of qualities, of first-person experience. And I don’t think it has the proper tools. I think it will have to add to its toolkit in some way, and find a way to bring in phenomenology, or lived experience and introspection, which science is usually dismissive of.The challenge—we alluded to it earlier—is that the only tool you have to study consciousness with is consciousness. And what I mean by that is, the whole scientific enterprise is a manifestation of consciousness. As much as scientists like to flatter themselves with this idea that they attain a godlike perspective on what they study, when it comes to consciousness, there’s no such thing. And it’s fine for all the things you can step outside of and study from that perspective. But two areas it won’t work are consciousness and cosmology.___It could be that we live in this anomaly of not believing nature is conscious. And maybe psychedelics are teaching us something we’ve forgotten.___With cosmology, too, you have to study the universe from inside the universe. It’s not that cosmologists haven’t made progress. We know a lot about the age of the universe and expansion and things like that. But we can’t penetrate what happened before the Big Bang. We just don’t have the tools because we can’t stand outside.The fact that there are 22 full-scale theories of consciousness tells you all you need to know: we’re kind of lost. And I was surprised to find that we are more lost than I thought we were when I started this. I thought that there’d be leading theories, or that we had experiments that we could conduct that would nail some of this down. And the fact is, we don’t.So, I don’t know if science can solve it. But, of course, we can change the rules of science. A really influential book for me was a book called The Blind Spot, by two physicists, Marcello Gleiser and Adam Frank, and a philosopher, Evan Thompson. It’s a reminder that science is a social practice. It’s organized in a certain way and it can be organized in a different way. But it has this huge blind spot at the center of it, which is its failure to recognize that it is a form of consciousness itself, and it doesn’t have a good way of taking account of lived experience.AC: On the one hand, I think you want to resist traditional dualism, which would say that consciousness is something magical, something supernatural, right? But on the other hand, you’re accepting that there is this division in reality between the stuff that you can investigate objectively and measure, and so on—the stuff that science has been good at finding out about—and consciousness, which, for some reason, you can’t objectively measure. Some would take this to suggest that the dualism is actually right. Is there a way of reconciling these two strands of your thinking?MP: To call it magical is full of value judgement. I mean, you could just say immaterial. The interesting thing is, I think, that intuitively we’re all dualists. And I don’t know whether that’s because we’re children of Descartes and other cultures are less dualist than we are. Or it may be because that’s how consciousness feels. It feels different than the body. It feels separate from the body. But I don’t think we should trust that intuition.AC: So let’s think about ways that science might be changed to get at consciousness. I suppose the starting point would be the way that you begin the second half of your book. You have this nice line from William James, where he says, “We now begin our study of the mind from within.” Could you give us some sense of the ways of studying the mind from within? What does this involve?MP: I don’t know what that science looks like. But one of the points I’m making is that it depends on the humanities. I found that I learned as much, if not more, about consciousness, from reading novels and poetry. There is a sense of the fullness and complexity of consciousness that you don’t get in any scientific account. I interviewed this stream-of-consciousness writer and I approached her as an expert on consciousness, and she is. So I think that dialogue is really important.I’m reading Ben Lerner’s new novel, Transcription. Just read the first page of this novel: it’s a man falling asleep on a train, going to conduct an interview, and there is the experience of being in the train, facing backwards, there’s the view outside, but there’s a reflection of himself through which he’s seeing outside. There’s the memory of dropping his kids off at school. All this is going on in one moment of consciousness. Scientists aren’t going anywhere near that. But I think it’s useful for them to think about. That’s where we’re trying to go: like, how does such a layered experience happen? You know, it also makes you wonder, could a computer ever do this? And it gives you some doubt.*AC: Before we get to computers, perhaps we could talk briefly about plants. How did you come to feel that they are sentient?MP: Well, it was a psychedelic experience, and it’s not unusual on psychedelics. In fact, there’ve been studies about how people become animists during psychedelic experience. Their belief in animism arises after a single psychedelic experience.You know, most scientists would say this is all a myth. But we have only 400 years of the age of enlightenment and science. Before that, we were animists, and if you go around the world, most indigenous cultures are still animists, and children are animists, by and large, until they go to school. So it could be that we live in this anomaly of not believing nature is conscious. And maybe psychedelics are teaching us something we’ve forgotten.As I said, I wanted to test this idea, and see whether there was conventional scientific evidence for it. And there’s fascinating work going on in a field that calls itself—in a rather cheeky way—plant neurobiology. These are people who fully realize there are no neurons in plants, but they’re trolling conventional botanists! And they’re doing experiments that are demonstrating that plants can learn and remember, which is kind of amazing: how do you store a memory without neurons? They’re finding plants that can solve problems, that can hear and see. In fact, they have 20 senses to our five or six. For example, a bean plant looking for something to twine, and given a pole within eight inches or so of it, knows where that pole is and will aim its spiraling reach at that pole. What is that about? Is it bouncing signals off of it?One of the spookiest things is the fact that the same anesthetics that put us out put plants out. You might think that plants are already out, but they’re not. They’re just slow. If you take a plant with a fast behavior, like a Venus flytrap, and give it an anesthetic, it will stop reacting. So you have to ask yourself, what is lost when the plant is anaesthetized? Some state of alertness, of awareness, of its environment, of reactivity. I’m not prepared to call that consciousness, but maybe it’s sentience—which is a simpler form of consciousness, and involves the ability to sense what’s going on in your environment and assess what’s good and bad for you and act appropriately. That may be a universal quality of life.AC: Let’s turn from plants to AI. You point out that LLMs are trained on the internet rather than direct interactions with reality. You put this really nicely when you say the internet is not the world so much as a shadow cast by the world. So LLMs are living in this kind of shadow world, or in Plato’s cave, as you put it. What’s the significance of this for AI consciousness and moral consideration? And, to recall the beginning of our conversation, if we’re stuck behind a veil or screen of consciousness, are we also stuck in a kind of shadow world?MP: I don’t think they’re the same shadow worlds because our world includes nature and other people. And even if it’s mediated in some ways... There is a reality out there, and we are in relation to it, through consciousness. There’s friction with it. What’s missing from the LLMs is that friction with the real world. There’s more to the world than human representation, which is what they’re dealing with. And that means that so far, AI is a cultural technology for combining thoughts we’ve already had. SUGGESTED VIEWING Cracking the code for thought With Roger Penrose, Sabrina Gonzalez Pasterski, Max Tegmark, Güneş Taylor Genuine creativity is more than collage. A lot of what AI does now is tantamount to collage, putting this with that and you know, that’s part of art, certainly. But there are also genuinely new ideas that come into the world that don’t come in through manipulating the representations we already have. So it remains to be seen whether AIs can be truly creative in that more radical sense.But my arguments against AI becoming conscious have to do with the fact that the idea of AI consciousness is based on this faulty metaphor that the brain is a computer. There are dimensions in which the brain is like a computer—it certainly does its share of computation. But computers have this sharp distinction between hardware and software, and brains don’t. In a brain, hardware and software are identical. Every memory is a physical change to the brain. Brains are not interchangeable in the way computers are. So this idea that you could take the consciousness out and somehow run it on another substrate, a silicon substrate, seems foolhardy.Anyway, it’s a more extended argument, and I may be wrong. And when we move to computers that aren’t based on silicon—neuromorphic computers and things like that—all bets may be off.AC: Regarding your point about LLMs being stuck in the world of our representations—the internet or whatever—and not being able to interact with reality, are these representations, the world of the internet, themselves part of reality? We’ve created the internet, but it’s still a real thing that exists. And so while the LLMs may be trapped within that part of reality, they’re nevertheless within reality and interacting with it and so on. So it’s not obvious that there’s a barrier there to them becoming conscious and being creative.MP: Yeah, I mean, if our consciousness is built out of human culture, which is what we’re talking about with all those representations. But I tend to think consciousness comes a bit more out of nature and friction with the natural world, but...AC: So there’s a fundamental divide between the natural world and human artefacts?MP: And we lose track of that, and especially people in this computer world. You know, the people who are creating these AI systems, my guess is they’ve been into video games since the age of three, and they didn’t go outside a lot. And their own contact with nature is somewhat limited. I could be wrong, it’d be a very interesting thing to ask, all the wizards of AI, whether they like to go fishing and hiking and do things like that. Or were they on computers from a very early age? I interviewed Blake Lemoine, the Google engineer who came to believe that LaMDA, the Google LLM out at the time, was conscious and deserved personhood. It was very clear that he didn’t see a distinction between this bubble in which he lived and the real world. And I think we’ve all been distanced from the natural world, and this is taking us even further away. But it’s still there, you know, and we still have bodies, and we’re still mortal, and we don’t live in a simulation.AC: I think that’s a great place to finish. Michael Pollan, thank you very much!
Is the military fueling eating disorders?
A brief hantavirus update, some good news about death, and more health news from Morning Rounds
Inspiring future innovators: 400+ middle, high school students explore career paths at App State STEAM Expo
Over 400 middle and high school students took part in App State’s STEAM Expo this spring, exploring science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics through hands-on learning and interactive engagement with App State faculty and students. The annual event helps students connect classroom concepts to future academic and career possibilities.
The U.S. is still a member of the WHO. That’s a good thing.
The World Health Organization has deftly handled attempts by countries to leave.
Pokémon GO Fest Chicago 2026: Top Spawns, Shinies & Best Pokémon to Catch (Raid & PvP Guide)
Good day, Pokémon Trainers! Pokémon GO Fest season is upon us and it promises to bring about some big changes to the formula! But this brings up the ever-popular question, What are the best Pokémon to catch? Well, not to worry fellow trainer, I’m here to help narrow the field! But before we get to […]
Scientists are cracking the code of interspecies communication. Is that a good thing?
Bioacousticians are finding animal communication patterns once thought unique to humans — discoveries that challenge ideas about what makes human language special.
Euro zone business wilts in May as war-driven inflation surges, pointing to Q2 GDP contraction
Euro zone private sector activity shrank at the fastest rate in 18 months in May as waning demand for goods and services — a key gauge of economic health — dragged output lower for a second month while cost pressures hit their highest level in more than three years, a survey showed.
'I feel fantastic!': An avid Pittsburgh sports fan fires the first pitch in a Pirates win
Dan “The Man” Turkall was born bleeding black and yellow. In the past three decades, Turkall, 35, has watched almost every Penguins, Steelers...
Tom Steyer spent over half a billion trying to get into politics. So far, not so good
Steyer is trailing Democrat Xavier Becerra for the No. 2 slot for the November general election by about 250,000 votes.
'It was very very good': Ötzi the Iceman's body is covered in ancient yeast — and scientists just used it to make a sourdough
A new study cultivated four strains of cold-adapted yeasts that had colonized Ötzi's body shortly after his death 5,300 years ago in the Alps.
Siri in iOS 27: Every New Feature and Change to Expect
Apple first introduced the idea of a smarter version of Siri at the 2024 Worldwide Developers Conference. Siri with Apple Intelligence was supposed to launch as part of iOS 18, but the underlying architecture wasn't good enough, and Apple was forced to delay the feature. We're now expecting a new version of Siri in iOS 27 with some long-awaited smarts.
Wilkinson will keep pushing Wales forward
Charlton midfielder Mia Ross says Wales boss Rhian Wilkinson's new contract is good news ahead of two Women's World Cup qualifiers.