SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY

Search headlines

Find the stories shaping the conversation.

Search mode
Refine results
Active filters Keyword All time

Results for " theo " 749 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle

Who does Sadie Sink play in 'Spider-Man: Brand New Day'?

Were your theories correct?

mashable.com logo
Jul 31 • 5:00 AM EDT • Entertainment • mashable.com
iPhone 18 Pro: Apple’s Launch Schedule Emerges With New Strategy

The next iPhones are going to appear in a split schedule, it seems, and a new report adds weight to the theory.

forbes.com logo
Jul 30 • 9:45 AM EDT • Technology • forbes.com
Stakeholder Theory Community Honors Professor Ed Freeman’s Impact on Business and Academia

A diverse group of collaborators and well-wishers descended on UVA to honor Professor Ed Freeman and the way his ideas have changed the world for the better.

news.darden.virginia.edu logo
Jul 30 • 9:32 AM EDT • Business • news.darden.virginia.edu
Deep dive
😐 Neutral (17%)
wow
57%
love
43%
After Hobbes vs Rousseau: Politics must move beyond human nature

Since the great debate between Hobbes and Rousseau, our political theory has been organised around a single question: is human nature essentially good or essentially corrupt? Graham Harman, the philosopher behind object-oriented ontology, argues that this is simply the wrong question to be asking. The real forces governing our collective fate - climate change, artificial intelligence, geography, and pandemics - are non-human; therefore, questions about human nature are not the central ones. Instead, Harman proposes a politics reorganised around our relationship to non-human objects and environments, in which quasi-government institutions incentivise and deter actions with the aim of extending the survival of the human race. “It is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism.” This has become one of the most popular phrases among twenty-first-century intellectuals. Often misattributed to Fredric Jameson, it has been warmly embraced by such influential authors as Slavoj Žižek and the tragically departed Mark Fisher, and has fueled the notion that the major problem with the political Left is that it simply needs to become more speculative and creative. Naturally, this is never a bad idea in any human pursuit. But what if the political distinction between Left, Right, and Center itself results from a failure of imagination? SUGGESTED READING Hobbes vs Rousseau: are we inherently evil? By Robin Douglass This particular division has been with us only since the summer of 1789. During the simmering prelude to the French Revolution, it referred originally to the physical position in the National Assembly of radical figures on one side and loyal monarchists on the other. These positions are linked with two entirely different camps of modern political theory. On the Left we find a series of authors ranging from the moderate (Locke) to the supercharged (Rousseau) to the truly radical (Marx), all of them contending that exploitation of the many by the few justifies revolutionary overthrow of the existing order. On the Right they are countered by the likes of Machiavelli, Hobbes, and Schmitt, a group of thinkers convinced that corrupt human nature can be tamed only by force. In the words of the Nazi supporter Schmitt: “One could test all theories of nature and state and political ideas according to their anthropology and classify these as to whether they consciously or unconsciously presuppose [humans] to be by nature evil or by nature good.” This is the division we continue to face today, even in the daily retail politics of Western democracies.___Our species has regularly proven itself capable of both the noblest gestures and the most scathing cruelties, making it hard to define us as essentially either emancipatory or brutal in our aims.___The most refreshing feature of David Graeber and David Wengrow’s 2021 book The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity was their awareness that the forced choice between Rousseau and Hobbes (as they put it) is no longer sufficient. Our species has regularly proven itself capable of both the noblest gestures and the most scathing cruelties, making it hard to define us as essentially either emancipatory or brutal in our aims. Far from being stationed “beyond good and evil,” we seem to be fully entangled with both. We are not naturally good or evil, Graeber and Wengrow contend, but naturally experimental and imaginative. They rest their case on the archaeological record, which seems to bear witness to numerous episodes of seasonally shifting governments and festivals, which vacillate in the same society (even in the same year) between the egalitarian and the dictatorial. Such praise of political experiment makes a good fit with the generally anarchist position defended by these authors. Yet it is also what I find most disappointing in their position. Although they are right that the forced choice between Hobbes and Rousseau falls short of what our new situation requires, the authors simply replace it with praise for the human being as a political tinkerer and performer. In other words, they give us just another theory of human nature, one that would not have been out of place in the sixteenth or seventeenth century. What other options might we have?___The time is ripe for a retheorization of politics on the basis of something other than human nature… We are not just alienated and limited by objects, but also empowered and unleashed by them___One fresh approach would be to treat politics within a broader framework than human nature, given that the polis does not exist in a vacuum filled exclusively with people. When Bruno Latour went to observe the baboons of Kenya with the San Diego anthropologist Shirley Strum, they jointly concluded that these primates were more socially interdependent than our own species. Each baboon is so reliant on the dynamics of the group that they find themselves locked into constant surveillance of their potentially dangerous peers. The group structure turns out to be inherently volatile. Humans, by contrast, are able to stabilize their societies to a large degree through the mediation of inanimate objects. Although one’s position in society may seem to fluctuate over time, considerable stability is produced through such items as apartment keys, wedding rings, and identification cards, all of them serving to secure us a place distinct from that of our fellows. The Italian philosopher Maurizio Ferraris has written at length about the crucial role of documents in establishing social relations, making him a hero among notaries in his country. Proper names and license plates cement our position amidst other humans, as do symbolic achievements such as graduation from a top university or distinguished wartime service with its various medals and ribbons. None of this is found among baboons, despite their closeness to us on the evolutionary tree: after all, we did share a common ancestor just 25 to 30 million years ago. SUGGESTED VIEWING The goodness paradox With Richard Wrangham The time is ripe for a retheorization of politics on the basis of something other than human nature, whether understood in the manner of the Left or of the Right. We are not just alienated and limited by objects, but also empowered and unleashed by them. But initially, it is true, we face non-human things primarily in the form of constraints. It would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to form a human civilization underwater, deep underground, atop Mount Everest, or in outer space. Human dependence on the non-social background takes on subtler form in discussions of political geography, especially unloved on the more idealistic Left. Consider the luckless position of Poland during World War II, sandwiched between Hitler on one side and Stalin on the other. By contrast, note the good fortune of the United States in not having a military peer positioned on any land border. Anglo-American geopolitics, since the writings of the American naval commander Alfred Thayer Mahan and the British geographer Sir Halford Mackinder, has been wedded to the notion that one or more liberal offshore naval powers should prevent any authoritarian “heartland” regime from gaining effective control of Eurasia. That remains the case whether the opponent is the impatient Napoleon, the swashbuckling German Kaiser, the villainous Hitler, the murderous Stalin, or the industrial juggernaut Chinese. In their current Foreign Affairs article “Heartland vs. Rimland,” Michael Beckley and Hal Brands analyze the current and coming state of the world on the basis of these same rather durable principles. In recent years a similar outlook has been embraced, in inverted form, by the Putin-loving Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin, an icon of the Rightist intellectual underworld. For Dugin, the Anglo-Saxons are an evil force bent on destroying the spiritually superior people of the land: much like Athens in its failed war with Sparta, or Carthage in its eventual collapse against Rome. But the shared notion on both sides is that any strategy that fails to take geography into account is likely to end up as a defeated form of excessive optimism.___When dealing with environmental degradation, then, we are doing business with forces that promise dire effects on our species as a whole.___More striking for us today than geography is the non-human object called climate, which threatens rimland and heartland equally. Even if we contend that humans are one hundred percent responsible for triggering the climate crisis, it remains non-human in the sense of being an independent force beyond our effective control. In a major work published just before his death in 2002, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, the American paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould noted the tendency of evolutionary theorists to focus too closely on the fate of individuals in view of their successful or failed adaptation to circumstances. With climate change, however, we confront a force that goes well beyond the scope of any individual life. Whereas Richard Dawkins extended evolutionary questions downward from individuals to the sub-individual gene, Gould pushed it upward, speaking of entire species or clades as impacted by environmental change. The asteroid that struck the Yucatán 66 million years ago is only the most famous example of this sort. In the wake of that catastrophe, large animals needing abundant supplies of food were at a fatal disadvantage by contrast with the smaller birds and mammals of the planet. When dealing with environmental degradation, then, we are doing business with forces that promise dire effects on our species as a whole. The effect is to shift our attention away from individual beings towards the survival of the group.In the United States in particular, the COVID-19 pandemic sparked considerable backlash among those who asserted a nearly absolute degree of individual freedom. In California I encountered those who demanded that their businesses be allowed to reopen, that it was enough to cover their mouths but not their noses, or that they should have the right to enter any public area despite refusing vaccination. Yet public health is probably the clearest argument against libertarianism, which often merely asserts the autonomy of individuals against any claims of the commons. In normal times the individual is worth defending; under conditions that threaten the survival of part or all of our species, compulsion may be our only resort, as with perfectly reasonable blackouts and rations in wartime. To rebuild human society under the constraints of climate change will be one of the great challenges of the century to come, as will our improvised grappling with artificial intelligence. Such phenomena pose existential risks for humanity, and leave far less room for tolerance of individual brattiness. Cases are mounting of devastating wildfires caused by arson. Recently it was reported that there is even a website where one can bet on the location of coming wildfires, raising the specter of deliberate blazes set to collect on wagers. The death penalty has steadily lost support in a world where many stress the infinite value of human life. But if we focus instead on entire ecosystems, those who purposely burn the forests may begin to look worse than serial murderers.___The politics of the future may be splintered by disagreement over such topics as how to manage our environing background and how to permit or restrict the entry of new objects into the political sphere.___So far I have spoken of force, authority, and punishment: measures sure to have greater appeal to those who identify with what we know as the Right. But other implications of the post-anthropocentric world are likely to have different backers. If non-human objects are seen as structuring political space, it stands to reason that they can no longer be introduced solely by the pace of technical breakthrough. Fields ranging from cybernetics to energy will demand increased politicization once they are reconceived not just as products of individual human investment, but as renovations of collective political geography. This need not involve world government, with its inherent risk of tyranny, but may involve quasi-governmental enforcers of prestige along the lines of a less corrupt FIFA or International Olympic Committee, punishing deviant states not with violence but with less tangible incentives.Politics will never lose its historic links with conflict and faction. But rather than factions aligned by differing theories of human nature, the politics of the future may be splintered by disagreement over such topics as how to manage our environing background and how to permit or restrict the entry of new objects into the political sphere. This will prove just as incommensurable with the modern Left/Right spectrum as a globe is with a two-dimensional map.

iai.tv logo
Jul 30 • 8:00 AM EDT • Politics • iai.tv
GTA 6' Trailer 3 Coming Soon According To Latest Fan Theory

Trust me, bro, I can feel something in the air, okay?

kotaku.com logo
Jul 29 • 5:30 PM EDT • Technology • kotaku.com
Fauci to face Republican questions over Covid pandemic origins

Veteran medical adviser likely to face questions over disputed ‘lab leak’ theory in investigation seen by scientists as ‘vilification and harassment’ of 85-year-old

theguardian.com logo
Jul 29 • 6:28 AM EDT • Politics • theguardian.com
A 20-Year-Old Quantum Entanglement Theory Has Finally Been Confirmed in Experiments

"Spooky action at a distance" is getting closer to fruition every day.

sciencealert.com logo
Jul 28 • 10:10 PM EDT • Science • sciencealert.com
😐 Neutral (10%)
ahah
50%
wow
50%
Roundtable: How Science Journalism Residencies Can Shape Careers at All Stages

Science journalism residencies give writers the chance to embed at a research institution for several months or longer.[/lead] Akin to a sabbatical, these residencies are a chance to step off the treadmill of one’s career to learn something new, immerse in the day-to-day of science, launch a project, or make a big move. Here, several writers discuss their recent experiences with residences—including how these programs can be accessible to writers at many stages of their careers.

theopennotebook.com logo
Jul 28 • 10:00 AM EDT • Science • theopennotebook.com
Without Harrison Smith, Vikings have questions at safety in 2026

The Vikings enter training camp with uncertainty at safety as Jay Ward, Theo Jackson and rookie Jakobe Thomas compete to help replace Harrison Smith.

sports.yahoo.com logo
Jul 24 • 8:25 PM EDT • Sports • sports.yahoo.com
😐 Neutral (17%)
wow
57%
ahah
43%
When It Comes to Fusion, Materials Matter

Fusion at high temperatures powers the sun and, if harnessed, could provide a potential source of energy here on Earth. But controlling fusion reactions has other benefits. The process also generates subatomic particles called neutrons that are used in a range of applications spanning medicine, research, and national security. Now, scientists at the University of California, Davis (UC Davis), and the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) have found that the materials surrounding a fusion reaction can dramatically increase how often it occurs, particularly at low energies where fusion is rare. The study was published July 18 in Nature Communications. Their approach sets up a way to study and engineer nuclear reactions within solid materials, opening a new field of “materials-driven fusion.” Instead of designing materials just to survive the harsh conditions of fusion, researchers might be able to design materials that boost the reaction in specific conditions, similar to the way catalysts speed up chemical processes. “It gives you a new knob to turn that you didn’t have before,” said Arun Persaud, head of the Fusion Science & Ion Beam Technology group in Berkeley Lab’s Accelerator Technology & Applied Physics (ATAP) Division. “If we understand this effect better, it opens the door to engineering new materials that would affect the fusion rate under certain conditions. Someday future progress might enable more compact and efficient neutron generators, which have all kinds of applications, like cargo screening, planetary science, and medical therapy and imaging.” In the experiment, researchers used two different methods to pack deuterium, a heavy form of hydrogen atoms that is often used in fusion, into thin foils of palladium and titanium. They then fired a beam of deuterium ions at the foils at different energies and measured how often fusion happened. Then they compared the rates from the different materials and methods with the “bare” fusion reaction (not in a material). The team found that fusion rates depended on how the deuterium was loaded into the metal foils. The biggest effect was at the lowest energies, below 2.5 kiloelectronvolts (keV), where theory predicts fusion rates drop off sharply. Instead, researchers found a surprising plateau: Some samples showed elevated fusion rates roughly a quintillion times higher than bare fusion reactions. (A quintillion is a 1 followed by 18 zeroes.) Researchers are not exactly sure why that’s happening, though they have some ideas and ways to test them. The electrons and defects within the material might partially shield repulsive electrostatic forces between deuterium nuclei, making it easier for them to get close together and fuse. Tuning the electronic structure, defects, and composition of materials could help make nuclear reactions happen more readily. “It comes down to better understanding the mechanism so that we can try to enhance it,” said corresponding author Jeremy Munday, a professor at UC Davis. “We’ve seen that we can increase fusion rates, but what is the limit? Can we bring it to lower temperatures or energies? There’s obviously a lot of interest and excitement about fusion, so if there’s something we can learn about the physics at these lower energy scales, maybe there’s something we can translate to other areas of nuclear science.” The team plans to explore a wider range of materials and continue probing the unexpected fusion plateau at lower energies. Their work establishes a reproducible experimental platform to study how solid materials influence nuclear reactions, creating a new area of research that links fusion science with materials science and chemistry. “The work shows conclusively that the material environment where fusion occurs at low temperatures is an active participant rather than a passive container,” said Cameron Geddes, director of ATAP. “That adds a new dimension to fusion research.” This work was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E). ### Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) is committed to groundbreaking research focused on discovery science and solutions for abundant and reliable energy supplies. The lab’s expertise spans materials, chemistry, physics, biology, earth and environmental science, mathematics, and computing. Researchers from around the world rely on the lab’s world-class scientific facilities for their own pioneering research. Founded in 1931 on the belief that the biggest problems are best addressed by teams, Berkeley Lab and its scientists have been recognized with 17 Nobel Prizes. Berkeley Lab is a multiprogram national laboratory managed by the University of California for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science. DOE’s Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States, and is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, please visit energy.gov/science.

newscenter.lbl.gov logo
Jul 23 • 11:00 AM EDT • Science • newscenter.lbl.gov
John Pardon Untangles the Theoretical Loops

The mathematics professor has won a prestigious Fields Medal for his work at the intersection of geometry, topology and physics.

nytimes.com logo
Jul 23 • 10:19 AM EDT • Science • nytimes.com
Why aren’t health insurers rushing to cover GLP-1 prescriptions for beneficial weight loss?

In theory, GLP-1 receptor agonist drugs like semaglutide and tirzepatide should save a lot of money for the health insurers that pay for them. As it turns out, the lived reality is not keeping pace with the idealistic expectation.

healthexec.com logo
Jul 22 • 5:44 PM EDT • Health • healthexec.com
‘Stuart Fails to Save the Universe’ review: A bafflingly unfunny spinoff

A spinoff of "The Big Bang Theory," "Stuart Fails to Save the Universe" (premiering Thursday on HBO and HBO Max) ultimately plays as one big shrug.

yakimaherald.com logo
Jul 22 • 12:00 PM EDT • Entertainment • yakimaherald.com
Why Did This Man Avoid Alzheimer’s? Scientists Reveal Their Astonishing Theory - Futura-Sciences

A Family Plagued by Early-Onset Alzheimer’s Doug Whitney inherited a rare genetic mutation that’s devastated much of his family: many relatives experienced significant cognitive decline as early as their 50s. Yet Doug himself has stayed mentally alert well past the age at which illness struck in the family. According to...

futura-sciences.com logo
Jul 22 • 9:00 AM EDT • Science • futura-sciences.com
Why have political double standards gotten worse?

Are double standards becoming the norm in American politics? In this episode of “Make It Make Sense,” Carine Hajjar and Brad Palumbo, an independent journalist and YouTube creator, break down the growing fractures on both the left and the right. They discuss recent Senate races involving Graham Platner and Abdul El-Sayed; the controversy surrounding Ken Paxton in Texas; and how media echo chambers, viral clips and conspiracy theories are pushing the country further apart.

washingtonpost.com logo
Jul 21 • 3:35 PM EDT • Politics • washingtonpost.com
Xbox Game Pass was a good idea in theory, former Forza Horizon 5 director says, but "the reality is not enough people have subscribed"

One of the lead creatives behind Forza Horizon 5, who departed developer Playground Games, still believes Xbox Game Pass was a solid concept.

eurogamer.net logo
Jul 21 • 9:59 AM EDT • Technology • eurogamer.net
Why Mitch McConnell's health has the internet so confused

As conspiracy theories swirl about Sen. Mitch McConnell, experts say it's normal to wonder, but health speculation can be harmful in some cases too.

usatoday.com logo
Jul 20 • 12:48 PM EDT • Health • usatoday.com
😐 Neutral (9%)
ahah
67%
wow
33%
Why do some people who trust in science also believe in scientific conspiracy theories?

Trust in science seems compatible with believing almost anything, so long as it is expressed in plausibly scientific terms.

theconversation.com logo
Jul 20 • 9:58 AM EDT • Science • theconversation.com
Shaky political "science": breakdown of the peer review process

[This article is the latest in our “Shaky Political Science” series. In our 38 page report, “Shaky political ‘science’ misses mark on ranked choice voting,” released in December 2025, we examined over 40 studies focused on ranked choice voting (RCV). Many of these studies suffered from puzzling research methodologies, poorly constructed surveys, unrealistic simulated elections, cherry picked data and faulty analyses that often were contradicted by results from real-world elections (a link to our full paper is here). Here are links to the first four articles in our series: the first one summarizing the overall results of our report; the second one analyzed a study co-authored by University of Minnesota academic Larry Jacobs, which was one of the most error-prone of all the research we reviewed in our report; a third article showing an admirable example of two political scientists holding two other political scientists accountable for their flawed, sloppy research; and a fourth article that analyzed seven studies sponsored by New America’s political reform program that deployed flawed methodology based on “simulated” elections instead of real-world elections, which when combined with some basic misunderstandings of RCV, produced odd and misleading results]. In this fifth article in our “Shaky Political Science” series, we examine two flawed studies on the impact of RCV on voter turnout authored by San Francisco State University professor Jason McDaniel. McDaniel’s research in these two papers stands out for its puzzling methodology, inadequate and cherry-picked data, and faulty analyses that not only misunderstands ranked choice voting but reflects a basic misunderstanding of politics in general. The first of the McDaniel studies actually passed through a peer review process and then was subsequently published by the Journal of Urban Affairs, despite its obvious errors. It is perplexing that a jury of peer political scientists did not catch the errors and send it back to McDaniel for a rewrite or outright rejection. This calls into question the credibility of the peer review process itself. The peer review process is supposed to represent the intellectual pinnacle of the profession – a way for academics to certify the quality of each other’s work, and to act as a check against sloppy research. In the case of the McDaniel study, the peer review process failed. Yet his flawed study has been cited dozens of times by other political scientists in their own flawed works — an unvirtuous circle of academic research. Here is the first Jason McDaniel study that we analyzed: “Writing the Rules to Rank the Candidates: Examining the Impact of Instant-Runoff Voting on Racial Group Turnout in San Francisco Mayoral Elections,” by Jason McDaniel, 2016, Journal of Urban Affairs. This study covered San Francisco’s use of ranked choice voting (RCV) in mayoral elections, purporting to show that RCV reduces voter turnout overall, increases voter errors, and has a negative impact on “marginal populations,” i.e. racial minorities, mainly as the result of the alleged complexity of RCV asking voters to rank candidates and having to be familiar with multiple candidates and related dynamics. McDaniel reached these conclusions by examining five San Francisco mayoral elections taking place in odd years (i.e. where there are no federal or state races on the ballot) from 1995 to 2011, comparing three earlier non-RCV races (in 1995, 1999 and 2003) with the later two RCV races (in 2007 and 2011). Only two RCV races were studied, and as McDaniel acknowledged, only the contest in 2011 was “competitive” (that contest in 2007 was the first mayoral election using RCV, and incumbent mayor Gavin Newsom won easily in the first round of counting, earning 74% of first choices and far ahead of the second place candidate who had just 6.3% of first choices). Yet even the allegedly competitive contest in 2011was won by an incumbent with a landslide margin of nearly 20 points. No other elections were studied by McDaniel, even though San Francisco elects 17 other offices besides mayor with RCV, including the 11 seats on the Board of Supervisors (the name for the city council) in even years, and six other citywide offices in odd years. Previous academic research has found that competitive elections can stimulate greater voter involvement and higher turnout. For unexplained reasons, this study ignored at least 34 other RCV races between the years 2004 to 2011, many of which were very competitive and had high voter turnout. Instead, McDaniel’s analysis based its conclusions on data from only a single, marginally-competitive mayor’s race using RCV. These 2007 and 2011 mayoral elections were the only two RCV elections that McDaniel used as the sole basis for his small data set to determine the impact of RCV on voter turnout. Despite having no meaningful data to inform his study, McDaniel nonetheless concluded that RCV lowered turnout when compared to the previous three mayoral non-RCV elections using two-round runoffs. Then, using the same inadequate database of San Francisco elections, McDaniel also found that “Instant-runoff voting is associated with a significant decline in Black voter turnout and White voter turnout…On average, Black voter turnout decreases by 18 points and White voter turnout decreases by 16 points …” But how could he credibly arrive at that conclusion when his study was based on voter turnout in two RCV contests that were not even remotely competitive? Beyond that, McDaniel tacitly admits that the key determining factor driving Black voter turnout was not RCV vs non-RCV elections, but the presence of a viable Black candidate. McDaniel wrote, “Black voter turnout was about 17 percentage points higher for the two elections that featured an African American candidate compared to the three elections that did not” — but one of those three elections did not use RCV. The same dynamic was present for White voter turnout, in which higher turnout was not correlated with RCV vs non-RCV elections, but the presence of a viable White candidate. Beyond that, McDaniel’s voter turnout results, whether correlated with the race of the candidates or RCV vs non-RCV elections, showed no clear patterns. In his Figure 1, he shows low Asian voter turnout in the non-RCV elections in 1999 and 2003 when there was no viable Asian candidate running, but in the 2007 mayoral election using RCV, there is still no viable Asian candidate, yet Asian turnout increases dramatically. For Latinos, voter turnout is virtually the same in 1999 (no viable Latino candidate, non-RCV elections), 2003 (leading Latino candidate, non-RCV elections), 2007 (no viable Latino candidate, RCV elections) and 2011 (leading Latino candidate, RCV elections). Meanwhile White voter turnout increased dramatically from a low in the 2007 mayoral election, in which the leading candidate was a white incumbent, to the 2011 election in which there were no leading white candidates that finished any higher than sixth place with 5.6% of the vote. Clearly other factors were determining voter turnout than either the race of the candidates or RCV vs non-RCV elections. Despite these inconsistent findings, McDaniel boldly marches forth to render conclusions about the impact of RCV on different groups of racial voters, even though his conclusions are not remotely supported by his data. This looks like the worst kind of “data cherry picking” to cover up a puzzling conclusion based on a poor data set involving only two RCV elections, neither of which were remotely competitive. McDaniel’s cherry picking didn’t stop there. In calculating voter turnout for the three non-RCV mayoral elections in 1995, 1999 and 2003, he failed to mention that in each of these years there was a two-round runoff election, with a first round election in November in which no candidate garnered a winning majority of the vote, followed by the decisive runoff in December. So there were two non-RCV elections in each election year. But McDaniel only decided to include one of the two elections in his data set, apparently the December runoff in each year (which had higher turnout in two out of the three mayor’s races, and lower turnout in the third). So he ignored the November 1995 election, the November 1999 election when turnout was only 45 percent, and the November 2003 election when turnout was only 45.7 percent. This is flawed methodology based on blatant cherry picking, since McDaniel simply omitted three elections worth of data that did not fit within his frame. His study should never have made it through a peer review process, and it is an embarrassment to political science that not only was it approved for publication, but it has been uncritically cited by dozens of other political scientists. Share A “study” without wider context or credible data Lacking a data set that included even a single competitive RCV mayoral race, McDaniel declared that RCV lowered voter turnout in 2011, when turnout was 42.5 percent. But he also ignored -- or did not realize -- that voter turnout in mayoral elections during 2011 had sharply declined in all big cities, including far more steeply in nearby Los Angeles and other cities. In fact, San Francisco’s election in 2011 had the second highest turnout of any mayoral election in the nation’s 22 largest cities from 2008-2011. Was 2011 just a particularly low turnout year all across the country, perhaps because the country was still reeling from the aftermath of the housing market collapse in 2008-2010? McDaniel ignored this factor and did not search for alternative explanations beyond his flawed thesis. Furthermore, while McDaniel suggested that RCV leads to more “overvotes” – which is an invalidated ballot in which a voter, in either a non-RCV or RCV race, makes a mistake and selects two candidates for a single choice – he failed to address that in the June 2012 US Senate primary contest, which used the typical “one-choice” plurality method and did not use RCV, there was more than five times as many overvotes in San Francisco and Oakland than in the RCV mayoral elections in those cities. Additionally, turnout had been significantly higher and more representative in RCV elections for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors races -- that McDaniel didn’t even bother to study -- as compared to previous “delayed two-round runoffs” for those offices, often higher by as much as 40% in the RCV races. Perhaps the most surprising irony was that an earlier study co-authored by McDaniel (Overvoting and the Equality of Voice under Instant-Runoff Voting in San Francisco by Francis Neely and Jason McDaniel, 2015, California Journal of Politics and Policy) found that overvotes are often more common in lower-income precincts, but that the pattern of overvoting is similar in both RCV and non-RCV contests. Wrote Neely and McDaniel: “[Overvote] errors appear to be a function of complexity in general and not IRV per se…. the pattern of overvoting is similar in both IRV and non-IRV contests…Even among votes cast in a top-of-the-ticket race like U.S. Senate, overvoting occurs in an uneven fashion” (IRV, or ‘instant runoff voting,’ is another name for ranked choice voting in single-winner contests). So McDaniel not only contradicted his own conclusion in his earlier study with Neely, but the earlier study had been an important corrective for one of the most frequently made mistakes made by anti-RCV political scientists – a continual failure to provide crucial context by pairing a comparative analysis of real world RCV elections with an analysis of real world plurality or other electoral methods. Unfortunately McDaniel’s earlier study does not get cited much by other researchers, and McDaniel did not even cite it in his own flawed study analyzed above. Incredibly, McDaniel cherrypicked McDaniel, even as his flawed study has been cited dozens of times. Despite being a textbook example of poor political “science,” featuring both inadequate as well as cherrypicked data, the shelf life of McDaniel’s study has been extended endlessly by other political scientists and media outlets who have cited it uncritically. Equally troubling, the Journal of Urban Affairs put this paper through its peer review process and published it despite its numerous flaws. McDaniel gets it wrong, Part II Not content with producing one shoddy, confused paper, McDaniel produced another one a few years later, here is the link: Electoral Rules and Voter Turnout in Mayoral Elections: An Analysis of Ranked-Choice Voting by Jason McDaniel. San Francisco State Univ. (McDaniel, 2019). In this paper, McDaniel extended his previous flawed research focused on San Francisco, about voter turnout and voter impact, to multiple RCV cities through the 2018 elections. In his data set he included San Francisco, Minneapolis, St Paul, Oakland, Berkeley, San Leandro and Santa Fe. He then compared their turnout in mayoral elections to non-RCV cities, and to mayoral elections in those cities held before first RCV usage, and concluded “a significant decrease in voter turnout of approximately 3–5 percentage points in RCV cities after the implementation of RCV.” But he replicated many of the same mistakes as his first study presented above. While in this study McDaniel attempted to distinguish between various factors, such as odd year vs. even year elections, competitive races vs. noncompetitive, contests with open seats and other factors, the analysis is superficial and inadequate. He attempts to incorporate so many often-conflicting variables that his conclusions are once again unsupported by the actual data, and ultimately unconvincing (this second study never underwent a peer review process). For example, McDaniel declared that for RCV cities “in elections that are more competitive than average (margin of victory less than 20%), there is no significant RCV effect on voter turnout.” Yet McDaniel is a professor in a city, San Francisco, in which the 2018 special election using RCV to fill a mayoral vacancy was exceedingly close, decided by a margin of only one percentage point, and resulted in the second highest turnout in San Francisco history for a mayoral election. Illustrating the complexity involved in assessing the critical factors in turnout, that special election was held on the same election day as federal and state offices, which tends to boost turnout. Yet more voters participated in that RCV mayoral election than voted on the same day in the non-RCV primary for governor in which former San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom was running. Even more puzzling, in this study McDaniel inaccurately cited his own previous study from 2015 with Neely. McDaniel wrote, “Neely and McDaniel (2015) examine individual ballot image files within a natural experiment, and find higher rates of ballot errors in RCV elections compared to non-RCV elections” (emphasis added). However, we quoted from that 2015 study several paragraphs above, and in actual fact Neely and McDaniel actually concluded the opposite -- that the pattern of overvoting – which is the most common form of ballot error – is similar in both RCV and non-RCV contests. McDaniel also ignored the fact that in Bay Area RCV elections held in even years – at the same time as federal and state elections, when turnout is highest -- the “undervote” (that is, the dropoff in ballots cast for governor or mayor) has declined, which contradicts his thesis that the act of ranking ballots in RCV elections is too complex and presents a barrier for certain demographics of voters. To his credit, McDaniel actually acknowledged another contradiction in his own paper, which found a negative RCV turnout effect in some odd-year elections but not others, admitting that “may present a challenge to the theory that increased complexity [from RCV] will have a marginal negative effect on voter turnout.” But he tried to wallpaper over that contradiction by blaming it on an unlikely source -- bad election administration. McDaniels wrote, “This would suggest that the negative impact of RCV on voter participation may be alleviated by high quality election administration,” without presenting any data or even anecdotes to support such an unfounded theory. While competent election administration of any election, whether RCV or non-RCV, is crucially important, there is no credible research that supports the far-fetched notion that the quality of election administration has much of an impact on voter turnout in US elections, whether using RCV or otherwise. Upgrade to a $5 subscription The unvirtuous circle of academic research It is puzzling how McDaniel’s first study could have survived the peer review process for the Journal of Urban Affairs. The mistakes in McDaniel’s first study above should have been obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of ranked choice voting as well as elections in general, and elections in San Francisco specifically. It undermines faith in the credibility of the peer review process to think that a jury of peer political scientists did not catch the egregious errors and reject McDaniel’s sloppy research and paper. And it remains a black mark on political science that this thoroughly discredited study has been cited dozens of times by other researchers. Indeed, in our research paper it became apparent that many political scientists cite each other’s flawed research to pad their list of citations and to legitimize their own flawed research, creating an unvirtuous circle of political science. More broadly, McDaniel’s voter turnout studies, like other studies evaluating RCV’s impact on turnout, lacked a recognition that no credible opinion or research can claim that RCV increases voter turnout merely because so many voters are excited to vote for their favorite candidates instead of “lesser evil” candidates without worrying about spoilers. Instead, with respect to turnout, the advantage of RCV has always been that, in most places where it has been used, it has eliminated a pre-November primary or post-November runoff, which usually saw about half the turnout of the November general election. This is especially true during even years when there are state and federal elections on the ballot which substantially drive turnout more than local contests. Any study that does not adequately account for this non-November primary/runoff vs November general election dynamic, or odd year vs even year election factors, is simply not credible. Both of McDaniel’s studies largely failed on those grounds. Steven Hill and Paul Haughey Share Upgrade to a $5 subscription Thanks for reading DemocracySOS…your digital portal for the pro-democracy movement. Subscribe for only $5 per month to receive full benefits and to support our work. Subscribe

democracysos.substack.com logo
Jul 20 • 9:29 AM EDT • Science • democracysos.substack.com
A Mathematician Used Claude Fable to Disprove the 87-Year-Old Jacobian Conjecture in a Few Hours

Levent Alpöge, a number theorist at Anthropic, announced on X that he had found a counterexample to one of algebraic geometry's most notorious problems, crediting Fable as his collaborator.

glitchwire.com logo
Jul 20 • 8:33 AM EDT • Technology • glitchwire.com
Colorado Republicans will have to live with the consequences of their candidate of choice

Two surprising election results this year in Colorado and Maine’s 2026 primaries compel us to examine the role of voters. It’s usually regarded as impolite, if not insulting, to question the judgment of voters. Democratic theory often implies the collective conclusions they reach capture some ephemeral element of shared wisdom. This may be true when […]

coloradopolitics.com logo
Jul 20 • 3:00 AM EDT • Politics • coloradopolitics.com
An ordinary laptop solved a problem thought to require a quantum computer

A quantum problem once described as impossible for classical computers has now been solved using relatively modest hardware. Researchers used tensor networks to compress the overwhelming wave function created by hundreds of entangled qubits, allowing some calculations to run on a laptop. Their results matched both theoretical predictions and simulations performed with a quantum computer. The method could open new paths for exploring quantum dynamics and materials.

sciencedaily.com logo
Jul 19 • 8:00 PM EDT • Science • sciencedaily.com
Jim Parsons says he wouldn’t star on ‘The Big Bang Theory’ again ‘for any amount of money’

Despite the fame and accolades, ‘The Big Bang Theory’ star Jim Parsons says that the show’s cultural peak was ‘stressful’ and ‘miserable,’ admitting that he wouldn’t do it again ‘for any amount of money.’

ew.com logo
Jul 18 • 2:12 PM EDT • Entertainment • ew.com
Rudolph Marcus, Who Illuminated Electrochemical Processes, Dies at 102

He received a 1992 Nobel Prize for developing a theory that explained fundamental processes behind photosynthesis, respiration, oxidation and even how fireflies produce light.

nytimes.com logo
Jul 17 • 1:51 PM EDT • Science • nytimes.com
Did this scientist solve humanity’s biggest mystery? The surprising theory explained - Futura-Sciences

From behind the Iron Curtain Gánti was born in Vác, Hungary, on September 10, 1933. He grew up during World War II and the subsequent Soviet occupation. Though he trained as a chemical engineer and worked in industrial biochemistry, his lifelong obsession was a fundamental question: what actually defines something...

futura-sciences.com logo
Jul 17 • 1:00 PM EDT • Science • futura-sciences.com
Trump doubles down on US election attacks in his primetime speech

President Donald Trump has used a primetime address to question the legitimacy of U.S. elections and push for more restrictive voting laws. The Republican president on Thursday revisited debunked theories

yakimaherald.com logo
Jul 17 • 6:14 AM EDT • Entertainment • yakimaherald.com
Sports without politics is a fantasy and the World Cup proves it

From ancient Greece to Nazi Germany, sport and politics have long been intertwined. Nevertheless, we still imagine that international sport can be kept above the fray and serve as a neutral arena where nations compete on merit alone. In this article, diplomacy scholar Geoffrey Allen Pigman argues the 2026 FIFA World Cup shows this is a dangerous illusion. When international sport is left entirely to revenue-maximizing private bodies like FIFA, it doesn't escape politics, but rather surrenders to its worst expressions. With the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics fast approaching, the IOC must decide whether to learn that lesson or repeat the same mistakes. The largest and most lucrative FIFA World Cup ever draws toward its climactic conclusion amidst a swirl of controversy. Team members, staff, fans, and spectators have been denied their right to enter the United States to participate, and US President Donald Trump intervened with FIFA boss Gianni Infantino to overturn a referee’s call that Trump believed disadvantaged the US national team. It is a moment to step back and reflect on what the purposes of international sport mega-events like the World Cup, and international sport more broadly, are, and what they should be. Does international sport serve public purposes? Is there a public interest? Or is it primarily a private endeavor organized by commercial enterprises to entertain the global public (and generate profit in the process), which is occasionally used by governments and leaders for raisons d’etat? Central to the idea of sport is the principle of fair play, which in the international context demands that games be free from political interference. However, it is impossible to separate sport from politics, all claims to the contrary notwithstanding. The most positive political use of international sport through the millennia has been to facilitate diplomacy. The use of international sport for diplomatic objectives has existed since at least the time of the ancient Olympic Games, around which was instituted the custom of the Ekecheiria, or Olympic Truce, between participating states to facilitate fair competition and diplomatic achievements by ensuring that participants could travel safely to the Olympiad. In his seminal work On Diplomacy (1987), diplomacy scholar James Der Derian characterized the objectives of diplomacy as overcoming alienation and mediating estrangement between governments and between peoples. One increasingly important diplomatic tool in the technology-infused media environment over the past century has been public diplomacy, under which governments and non-state diplomatic actors (e.g. transnational corporations) communicate to global publics about their international policy objectives and to shape their global brand image. Political scientist Michał Kobierecki, in his important book Sports Diplomacy (2020), views sports diplomacy as falling broadly within the ambit of public diplomacy, as international sport intimately involves the participation of global publics as spectators and consumers of global media. Diplomacy scholar Stuart Murray and this author, in a 2013 article, distinguish between international sport used for diplomatic purposes and international sport-as-diplomacy, which encompasses the range of diplomacy that occurs as teams and competitors, spectators and fans, and government officials all converge for international sporting events like the Olympic Games and FIFA World Cup. Diplomacy scholar H.E. Chehabi, in a 2001 article on US-Iran sports diplomacy, describes the interaction between spectators and fans at international sporting events as “people-to-people diplomacy,” in which relationships develop independently of governments and their objectives. Diplomacy by the aforementioned definitions is often unsuccessful. Moreover, all too often the tools of diplomacy may be employed by governments and other actors to thwart or oppose the objectives of diplomacy as characterized by Der Derian. Governments routinely use the tools of public diplomacy to disseminate propaganda, spreading misinformation in the attempt to deceive global publics about their objectives and to create misleading impressions about their brand identity. Within sports diplomacy, the term “sportswashing” has been coined recently to describe how governments invest in and promote international sport to create positive global public impressions of their nations and, in doing so, to distract the global public from their deficient records in areas such as human rights and democratic governance. Murray, in his 2018 book Sports Diplomacy: Origins, Theory and Practice, introduces the concept of sports anti-diplomacy, wherein governments intentionally use international sport to advance aggressive and nationalistic objectives. Obvious historical examples include Hitler’s use of the 1936 Berlin Olympics to glorify his Third Reich and the 1969 El Salvador-Honduras football “war.” SUGGESTED READING The beautiful game made ugly By Emily Ryall FIFA argues that it is and seeks to be apolitical in its stewardship of international Association Football (soccer). FIFA policies governing bids to host the World Cup require uninhibited and non-discriminatory access for players, team staff, and spectators of all participating countries to host nations and venues. It became clear soon after Trump returned to power in the United States in January 2025 that Trump’s political intentions and objectives to limit non-US citizens from living and working in the United States and, in numerous cases, even visiting the country, would collide with FIFA’s host nation policies. Beginning soon after the start of the second Trump administration, US federal authorities imposed restrictions on entry to the United States of citizens of between 20 and 40 countries for any purpose, with only limited exceptions. Federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) began arresting non-US citizens in the United States, including persons with and without legal status, holding them in jails, concentration camps, and other detention facilities until they were deported to their home or third countries, where they faced substantive risks to their personal safety. FIFA boss Gianni Infantino, in an effort to ensure the most successful and lucrative World Cup in history, engaged diplomatically with President Trump in an attempt to facilitate entry to the US for World Cup participants. Infantino did all in his power to ingratiate himself with Trump, to the extent of creating a FIFA “Peace Prize,” which he awarded to Trump in December 2025 at a ceremony in the then Trump-controlled John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, DC, on the occasion of the World Cup draw. The prize was an ersatz consolation for someone who aspired in vain to win the rather more prestigious and well-known Nobel Peace Prize. And in the run-up to the World Cup, conditions became worse. In February 2026, Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched a war of aggression against Iran, illegal under international law, under the false pretence that Iran’s government was preparing to attack the United States and Israel. During the US aerial bombardment of Iran, US planes bombed Azadi Stadium, the facility where Iran’s national football team trained. As the 2026 FIFA World Cup began, it was clear that Infantino’s efforts had been for naught: the Trump administration would not adhere to FIFA policies governing access to World Cup host nations. World Cup referee Omar Artan, a citizen of Somalia, was denied a US visa to enter the United States to participate in the World Cup. Trump’s government only granted US visas to Iran’s football team ten days before they were scheduled to arrive for the tournament. Numerous members of the support staff for Iran’s team were denied US visas. Iran’s team, which had been scheduled to train in Arizona, was directed to shift its training site to Tijuana, Mexico, notwithstanding that all three of their group stage matches took place at US venues. The US Department of Homeland Security only permitted the Iranian team to enter the US on the day before each scheduled match and then to return to Mexico immediately after playing. Members of Iraq’s and Switzerland’s football teams were delayed for hours by US officials at the US border, and an Iraqi team photographer was refused entry. Spectators and fans from Haïti and Iran were denied entry to the United States altogether. A large number of fans from a range of countries had their applications for US visas rejected. There were multiple off-ramps through which participants could have avoided the negative consequences of Trump’s decisions for the 2026 World Cup. Once it was clear that the Trump government intended to violate the established expectations for World Cup hosts, FIFA could have shifted the matches scheduled to take place in the United States to Mexico and Canada. The three nations were already designated as co-hosts, and host cities and venues had been selected. Once it was clear that FIFA, governed by FIFA boss Gianni Infantino’s dependent and dysfunctional relationship with Trump, would never consider this option on its own, it fell to the national football federations to act. The national federations, particularly some combination of federations of the leading contenders (France, Spain, Brazil, Argentina, Morocco, England, Germany, etc.), could have refused to participate under the US-imposed conditions or, at the least, demanded an ironclad agreement with the Trump government that FIFA policies on access would be respected. ___ International sport is inextricably entangled with diplomacy of different sorts, for good or ill, it cannot be considered to be in the purely private realm and left to revenue-maximizing private actors. ___ Why did neither FIFA nor the national football federations act to protect the interests of players, team staff, referees, fans, and spectators? In essence, the relentless engines of capitalism prevailed over norm observance, ethics, and fair play. The revenue interests of FIFA, sponsors, global media, and host cities won out. FIFA’s managers viewed hosting another World Cup principally in the United States as a veritable pot of gold for FIFA and its collaborators. FIFA has estimated its own revenue over the 2023-26 budget cycle, which includes the 2026 World Cup, at $13 billion, revised up from an initial projection of $11 billion, and 72% higher than the previous revenue cycle. Of that total, FIFA is estimated to have generated $8.9 billion from the Cup itself in revenue from TV rights ($3.92 billion), sponsorships ($2.69 billion), ticket sales ($3.1 billion), licensing rights, and other sources. A joint study by FIFA and the World Trade Organization estimates that the World Cup will contribute over $40 billion to global GDP, including nearly $14 billion in direct visitor spending in the three host countries (but principally in the United States, which hosted the lion’s share of the matches). The FIFA World Cup is now reportedly “the single most lucrative recurring commercial property in global sport.” And yet, notwithstanding the Trump government’s uses of the World Cup for sports anti-diplomacy, and the climate of anxiety that this created for participants and spectators, diplomacy that did not depend upon governments was able to thrive at the World Cup. Examples of successful people-to-people diplomacy were legion, as citizens of towns and cities across the States, as well as in Mexico and Canada, welcomed team members, their families and supporters, to training sites across North America. Fans of different teams joined together in person in stadiums for matches, at watch parties and bars, and at welcome events sponsored by host cities. The joy and camaraderie shared between the citizenry of Boston and Scotland’s “Tartan Army” of fans is but one example of how the “Beautiful Game” brings people together. Friendships forged across continents are likely to endure well beyond the Cup final. Even those achievements cannot be seen as unalloyed, however. As South African football fan Byron Pillay commented to Al Jazeera, “Football is called the Beautiful Game for a reason, for its ability to unite people. But it’s hard to believe in that magic with the politics and war rhetoric off the field of play, especially when one of the tournament hosts is central to that.” Ultimately, the experience of the 2026 FIFA World Cup illustrates that, as international sport is inextricably entangled with diplomacy of different sorts, for good or ill, it cannot be considered to be in the purely private realm and left to revenue-maximizing private actors. As long as there is the possibility of diplomatic progress in mediating estrangement between governments or between peoples, there is a broad and overarching public interest in international sport. Likewise, as it would be difficult to put on an international sport mega-event without international sporting organizations like FIFA and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), global media firms, and companies purchasing sponsorships, public and private interests in international sport must coexist, most likely somewhere on a shifting spectrum between partnership and rivalry or cross purposes. As the World Cup wraps up, the IOC needs to consider its lessons before the scheduled 2028 Los Angeles Olympics if they want to avoid a media-hyped Trump version of the 1936 Berlin Olympiad. The IOC and the National Olympic Committees need to set conditions on and make demands of Trump’s government with clearly articulated consequences for non-compliance, up to and including cancellation of the Games. Time is running out for the IOC, as unlike with the FIFA World Cup, there is no at-the-ready alternate venue for Los Angeles.

iai.tv logo
Jul 16 • 8:00 PM EDT • Politics • iai.tv
The States Try to Topple WarnerMount…Thus Begins the Local Antitrust Era

(Welcome to the “Most Important Story of the Week”, my bi-weekly strategy column analyzing the most important (but often not buzziest) news story of the last two weeks. I’m the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a former streaming executive who now analyzes business strategy in the entertainment industry. Please subscribe.) Well, it looks like it’s time for another strategy column. Can I finally avoid writing about M&A? No, it seems I cannot. Admittedly, I’m a week early with this column, since I usually put it out every other week. But this news couldn’t wait. This will make three “Most Important Stories” in a row with a merger or acquisition as its centerpiece. First, Roku-Fox (an acquisition), then Comcast-NBCUniversal (a divestment!), and now the State AGs and the WGA’s lawsuits against Paramount’s pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery (antitrust). M&A is usually the “most important” topic any given week, simply because a giant company merging or breaking up (or preventing those outcomes) can have the biggest impact on the streaming board. If you think about these companies as players in a game, changing the number of players is one of the biggest changes you can make. I shouldn’t really complain, either, since this lawsuit is very good news for customers and suppliers (econ speak for talent, workers and indie studios in Hollywood). So let me answer some questions about this potential trial, along with (shudder) making some heavily caveated predictions. I’ll also look at whether Hollywood must consolidate, whether or not the states can win, trouble at X-Box, Netflix’s YouTube binge, and more. Plus, I have five images that visualize this merger and the harm, including three brand new data looks you’ve never seen before. Subscribe Most Important Story of the Week - Can The States and the WGA Stop Hollywood’s Consolidation (Crisis)? If every other newsletter and news outlet is writing about the same story, I try to avoid writing about it as well, but I can’t ignore a story this consequential. The story of the last year was the fate of Warner Bros. Discovery, and this development potentially extends that saga into 2027. As I tried to figure out my angle, I realized, like my last column, I’m again faced with a series of questions. These questions, though, are much more forward-looking. Will the states win? Will the WGA win? If so, what happens to Warner Bros. Discovery? Either way, will this chill the market for future mergers? So you know what that means: predictions. About the future, no less, the hardest thing to predict.1 Just remember: nothing here comes with a guarantee. And the more confident someone is in their predictions, the less you should trust them. This situation is incredibly fluid, nuanced, uncertain and tenuous. So let’s try to explain what may happen. Question: Why File this Lawsuit? I’ll admit, a few months back, I was fairly pessimistic about the fate of this lawsuit. Rumors had started bubbling up that the state Attorneys General (in particular California) wanted to settle with either some minor divestments (usually CNN) or behavioral remedies. And that tracked for me: the states usually settle lawsuits, like the recent John Deere right-to-repair suit. Yet, they plan to fight this. (As they did the LiveNation-Ticketmaster monopolization trial and the Nexstar-Tegna merger.) Honestly, that also makes a ton of sense. Frankly, this move is just good politics for these State AGs. Most are still running for higher and higher office in blue states—some folks have emphasized that only Democratic AGs joined this suit, but given the Ellison/Trump ties, and fears of retribution, that tracks—and a high profile case like this will help them move up the electoral ladder, especially since Paramount and its leadership (the Ellisons, father and heir) have sided with the other side of the political aisle. That makes them unsympathetic to Democratic voters and Hollywood workers in particular. Why did this lawsuit happen? In addition to the very real concerns about industry consolidation, this is why. That said, I don’t think we would have seen this lawsuit for Netflix and Warner Bros., simply because they’re more sympathetic and aligned with Democrats. But those consolidation concerns are real. The “town”—meaning Hollywood and such—really is seeing the damage of mergers on this industry. That’s why the WGA also filed its own lawsuit in defense of workers as well. (Wildcard: What about Europe? Will they try to stop the deal, too? There have been some rumors out of the UK they may try to fight the deal, and UK enforcers just stopped a Getty Images-Shutterstock tie up, so there is precedence. This argument could go either way, though. On one hand, the EU doesn’t need to step in, cause they states are handling it. On the other hand, this could make the EU’s case easier. Just imagine if both sides coordinated. I’ll simply say, “We’ll see!”) Question: Will The State AGs or the WGA Win? Can the state AGs play David to Paramount-Skydance’s Goliath here? That’s really the whole thing, isn’t it? If you know this result, you could make a lot of money. When things are uncertain, it’s tempting to shrug and say, “Eh” meaning it’s a 50/50 proposition. I wouldn’t, though. When in doubt, you should expect that the merging parties succeed. AT&T did successfully buy Warner Bros., after all, and Disney bought Fox without any challenges. Many judges are extremely sympathetic to mergers, and I’d bet the state AGs get a judge who will allow the merger. (Even Obama-appointed judges often allow mergers.) As I understand it, we’ll see two main attacks. First, theatrical films. The AGs are arguing that, when it comes to share of box office and the number of both “wide releases” and blockbuster (or “tentpole”) films, the merging parties will have over 27% market share. Now, the Supreme Court once ruled from on high that any merger that exceeds 30% is presumptively illegal, but that’s guidance, not an ironclad bar. Still, the states will have to argue that this is close to having too much power, and with that power, this will likely further worsen the theater/studio splits in particular. Indeed, as Matthew Stoller pointed out, “just five studios are responsible for 95% of all blockbusters; if this merger goes through, then Paramount and Disney will control 60% of that.” So yes, movie studios will be very concentrated after this merger. Want me to visualize some of that? Well, here’s the share of films that grossed over $200 million at the domestic box office since 2022. (Note: this isn’t all films released in over 3,000 screens, but it is a good look at market power.) First, here are the 43 films by studio: Notice all the blue (Disney), orange (Universal), and purple (Warner Bros)? Yeah, those studios are powerful, and this combines Paramount with one of them. Here’s the look by studio and share of the films that grossed over $200 million: Now, if you look at that and also think, “Huh, should we break up Disney?” I’m with you. I’ve seen some folks poo-poo this idea that this is a real category, but it is! For an upcoming article, I’ve been pulling data on the share of top 100 films at the box office as a share of total box office, and it’s massive. Here’s the chart: (This analysis looks at The-Number’s top 100 films and total domestic box office each year.) To be clear, tentpoles make up 80.7% of the box office each year, so I do think it’s a genuine market. (To be clear, films grossing over $50 million make up 80% of the domestic box office, and films grossing over $100 million make up 64.1%.) I mean, the top 100 films at the box office make up 95% of each year’s grosses. Worse, the combined studios will likely cut output to flex that market power. Everyone can just look at what happened to Disney and Fox to see the precedent. (With fewer films, the remaining theaters have to give more for those few films that remain.) Here’s an image I’ve used a lot, the share of wide-release films from Disney and Fox over time: The AGs will also argue that this consolidation will also impact the cable industry. In this case, the consolidation is actually worse, but that environment is…complicated. Paramount will argue that the cable industry is shrinking. That said, predictions that cable will “go to zero” also don’t look very well supported by the data, as the declines are shrinking, meaning “cable” or “vMVPDs” will likely stabilize at some point. Can the state Attorneys General win on those two main arguments? I honestly don’t know. Again, I’d bet no, since history in general supports that, but it depends on the judge/jury and how they interpret the arguments. Notably, Paramount won’t face accusations about monopoly power in other areas, like streaming, news, sports rights, or vertical integration. I tend to disagree with leaving out sports rights, but I also see the appeal for a simpler case. The states also aren’t really pushing novel theories about labor harm either, which should help. (By the way, Sean McNulty at The Ankler wrote a great run through of potential options, and Capitol Forum also wrote a great paper on theatrical consolidation. Both these pieces predated the lawsuit. Matthew Stoller is also out with his analysis of the pros and cons of the case too.) In some ways, the WGA’s case is even stronger. Quoting Sean McNulty’s summary: “The WGA is citing WARNAMOUNT as crossing a 30% market share in multiple sectors, a number that the Supreme Court has precedent for deeming “presumptively anticompetitive” in a market. According to the WGA numbers, WARNAMOUNT would have represented: - 35% of film writing jobs between 2021 and 2024 - 36% of TV writing projects between 2022 and 2025 - 38% of overall deals between 2021 and 2024” Notably, antitrust enforcers did win recently in the Penguin-Simon & Schuster merger by focusing on labor impact, so don’t count this thinking out. (Wildcard: Will the states try to get a jury trial? Most likely no, they’ll let a judge handle it. If I’m them, though, I’d try to put this in front of a jury. Juries tend to understand monopoly power in a more realistic way than judges faced with legions of economists.) Question: What if They Win? What if They Lose?

entertainment.substack.com logo
Jul 15 • 4:48 PM EDT • Entertainment • entertainment.substack.com
Deep dive
😐 Neutral (20%)
wow
39%
ahah
38%
love
23%
Trump will speak on elections in primetime address

The topic suggests he could revisit long-debunked conspiracy theories about his 2020 defeat to President Joe Biden as he's escalated calls for Republicans to pass tighter federal voting rules before November's midterm elections

spectrumlocalnews.com logo
Jul 15 • 7:56 AM EDT • Politics • spectrumlocalnews.com
August's solar eclipse inspires science involving jets, balloons and Einstein’s general theory of relativity

Solar eclipses are a rare and brief opportunity for scientists to gather data on everything from the physics of the sun to air pressure in the upper atmosphere

scientificamerican.com logo
Jul 15 • 6:00 AM EDT • Science • scientificamerican.com
Power of 7: Could an ancient political feud explain Qumran sect’s faulty 364-day calendar?

New theory offers a solution to one of the Dead Sea Scrolls' longest-running puzzles, arguing the out-of-sync calendar was used for ideological reasons -- until it felt safe to abandon it

timesofisrael.com logo
Jul 14 • 8:00 PM EDT • Politics • timesofisrael.com
An Invitation to Scribble in the Margins of The Best Science Stories and How They Work

The Open Notebook's new book The Best Science Stories and How They Work: A Collection with Commentary officially launches on July 21, 2026. You're invited to scribble in the margins!

theopennotebook.com logo
Jul 14 • 10:00 AM EDT • Science • theopennotebook.com
In an era of suspicion, political conspiracy theories flourish online

The internet’s reactionary machinery is churning at full force after Lindsey Graham’s sudden death and Mitch McConnell’s illness.

washingtonpost.com logo
Jul 14 • 5:00 AM EDT • Politics • washingtonpost.com
Conspiracy theories about Sen. McConnell’s health spread after his office posts hospital photo

Even two of McConnell’s GOP colleagues questioned the photograph, without evidence, in a sign of political distrust after his office spent weeks declining to explain his hospitalization.

nbcnews.com logo
Jul 13 • 9:34 PM EDT • Politics • nbcnews.com
High-Signal Publisher
Conspiracy theories about Sen. McConnell’s health spread after his office posts hospital photo

Even two of McConnell’s GOP colleagues questioned the photograph, without evidence, in a sign of political distrust after his office spent weeks declining to explain his hospitalization.

nbcnews.com logo
Jul 13 • 9:34 PM EDT • Health • nbcnews.com
High-Signal Publisher
Sara Gilbert's Exes Who Have Spoken Out About Their Relationship

"The Connors" star Sara Gilbert has some high profile exes, including a star of "The Big Bang Theory," but what have they said about the actor?

yahoo.com logo
Jul 13 • 1:00 PM EDT • Entertainment • yahoo.com
New dark matter theory could solve multiple cosmic mysteries at once

Dark matter may be far more complicated than scientists once believed. A new study suggests it could consist of at least two different kinds of particles that slowly separate over time, with heavier particles sinking toward the centers of galaxies and lighter ones drifting outward. This simple idea could explain several puzzling cosmic observations that have frustrated astronomers for years, from unusually diffuse dwarf galaxies to surprisingly dense dark matter clumps that bend light through gravitational lensing.

sciencedaily.com logo
Jul 13 • 8:00 AM EDT • Science • sciencedaily.com
Physicists recreate black hole energy extraction in the lab

Researchers have recreated the physics of extracting energy from a spinning black hole using a stationary device that produces synthetic ultrafast rotation. The achievement transforms a long-standing theoretical idea into a practical experiment and could inspire new advances in optics, wireless communications, and quantum science.

sciencedaily.com logo
Jul 12 • 8:00 AM EDT • Science • sciencedaily.com
Scientists Used AI to Find Hidden Earthquake Signals Along the San Andreas Fault

Scientists used to think so-called “slow slip events” were “theoretically impossible.” Now these subtle tectonic shifts could be the key to predicting future earthquakes.

gizmodo.com logo
Jul 10 • 2:20 PM EDT • Science • gizmodo.com
Structural Factors Impacting White Men’s Health

LDI Fellow Derek Griffith and a colleague theorize that structural factors that benefit white men also may contribute to their poorer behavioral health outcomes.

ldi.upenn.edu logo
Jul 9 • 9:42 AM EDT • Health • ldi.upenn.edu
‘Check your ingredients’: A new blueprint for using Fermi’s ‘Golden Rule’

Fermi’s “Golden Rule” is a formula that connects theoretical quantum mechanics and what scientists observe in experiments, yet it is often misapplied. A new study by Yale physicists put this foundational formula through its paces.

news.yale.edu logo
Jul 9 • 5:00 AM EDT • Science • news.yale.edu
Scientists finally solved a 150-year-old gallium mystery

Scientists have rewritten the story of gallium after discovering that its unusual atomic bonds re-form at high temperatures, contradicting decades of accepted theory. The finding changes how researchers explain why the metal melts so easily and behaves unlike almost any other metal. Beyond solving a long-standing scientific mystery, the work could lead to advances in semiconductors, nanotechnology, and liquid metal engineering.

sciencedaily.com logo
Jul 8 • 8:00 PM EDT • Science • sciencedaily.com
Longtime friends and business partners thrive as architecture grad students

Setareh Farashzadeh and Yasaman Ghaffarian came to Penn State as close friends and established architects in pursuit of the history and theory behind their chosen field. Originally from Iran, the duo started their own practice after earning their bachelor’s degrees and jointly decided to expand their understanding of the built environment. Their interests and underlying friendship led them to the dual master of architecture and master of science in architecture program in the College of Arts and Architecture’s Stuckeman School.

psu.edu logo
Jul 8 • 2:36 PM EDT • Business • psu.edu
How North Dakota Finally Built Theodore Roosevelt's New Library

Doug Burgum, Kelly Armstrong and Kevin Cramer discuss the state's biggest new landmark and the politics of the moment.

politico.com logo
Jul 8 • 7:25 AM EDT • Politics • politico.com
'Time was speeding up, slowing down, or even stopping': Physicist demonstrates a key theory of time by building a 'mini-universe' in his lab

By ignoring part of his own experiment, a physicist coaxed time to emerge from within a closed quantum system.

livescience.com logo
Jul 7 • 12:18 PM EDT • Science • livescience.com
Jesse Thaler named director of the Laboratory for Nuclear Science

Jesse Thaler has been named director of the MIT Laboratory for Nuclear Science. Thaler is a theoretical particle physicist who combines techniques from quantum field theory and machine learning to address outstanding questions in fundamental physics.

news.mit.edu logo
Jul 7 • 10:45 AM EDT • Science • news.mit.edu
Is there a Trump sports curse? USMNT's World Cup flameout revives the theory

From the Knicks' NBA Finals stumble to USMNT's Belgium blowout, a pattern keeps surfacing whenever the president shows up. Is it real?

usatoday.com logo
Jul 7 • 12:00 AM EDT • Sports • usatoday.com
Anthropic's new "J-lens" reveals a silent workspace inside Claude that mirrors a leading theory of consciousness

Anthropic’s new Claude research reveals a hidden internal “global workspace” that resembles human conscious processing, raising major questions about AI reasoning, interpretability, safety, and machine consciousness.

venturebeat.com logo
Jul 6 • 5:00 PM EDT • Technology • venturebeat.com
Joint statement from The University of Alabama and Auburn University regarding the Protect College Sports Act

The University of Alabama and Auburn University oppose the Protect College Sports Act and urge the Senate not to advance it in its current form.

news.ua.edu logo
Jul 6 • 11:55 AM EDT • Sports • news.ua.edu
Science news blues

The hemorrhage of local journalists nationwide continues, according to the Local Journalist Index 2026, a project of Rebuilding Local News and Muck Rack.

isthmus.com logo
Jul 6 • 5:00 AM EDT • Science • isthmus.com
For the 2014 film Interstellar, director Christopher Nolan hired Caltech physicist Kip Thorne as his science consultant — and the visual simulations Thorne helped design for the film's black hole were so mathematically accurate that they generated two peer-reviewed scientific papers and became the model for how astrophysicists visualize black holes today

In late 2012, when the American film director Christopher Nolan formally took over the production of a Warner Brothers science-fiction project that had been drifting through Hollywood development since approximately 2005 (originally intended for Steven Spielberg, based on a screenplay concept the film producer Lynda Obst had developed jointly with the Caltech theoretical physicist Kip […]

spacedaily.com logo
Jul 5 • 4:45 AM EDT • Science • spacedaily.com
3 Olympia-area businesses are closing or closed, plus library approves furloughs

Learn about the latest happenings with Thurston County businesses.

theolympian.com logo
Jul 3 • 8:00 AM EDT • Business • theolympian.com
Melissa McCarthy and Clive Owen to play JonBenét Ramsey's parents in new Netflix series

"The Murder of JonBenét Ramsey" aims to examine the case from multiple viewpoints, including those of the Ramsey family and investigators, rather than presenting a single theory.

yahoo.com logo
Jul 2 • 1:40 PM EDT • Entertainment • yahoo.com
A strange LIGO signal could reveal the missing link behind dark matter

An unusual gravitational wave signal has renewed hopes that primordial black holes, long considered purely theoretical, may finally be within reach of discovery. If confirmed, they could solve one of astronomy's greatest mysteries by explaining the nature of dark matter.

sciencedaily.com logo
Jul 2 • 8:00 AM EDT • Science • sciencedaily.com
It’s one of the biggest mysteries of the cosmos: What are these little red dots?

Massive galaxies? Dusty black holes? Black hole stars? Scientists have raised a lot of theories around what the crimson blobs in James Webb data might be.

nationalgeographic.com logo
Jul 1 • 8:00 PM EDT • Science • nationalgeographic.com
Identity Politics: The Good, The Bad, And The… Hotly Contested

Should our government ignore our identities or focus on them? In this episode of Crash Course Political Theory, we’ll explore the role identity plays in politics and government, from affirmative action to white backlash, and ask, “What is fair?”

thirteen.org logo
Jul 1 • 5:13 PM EDT • Politics • thirteen.org
Trump visits newly built Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library in North Dakota

The facility's grand opening is July Fourth, but Trump visited Wednesday to see the library and to speak to a crowd at a nearby amphitheater

spectrumlocalnews.com logo
Jul 1 • 5:06 PM EDT • Politics • spectrumlocalnews.com
WATCH LIVE: Trump attends Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library dedication ceremony
pbs.org logo
Jul 1 • 11:10 AM EDT • Politics • pbs.org
A Longstanding Theory of Childbirth Is a Myth

Delivering a human baby is not uniquely difficult.

theatlantic.com logo
Jun 29 • 11:39 AM EDT • Science • theatlantic.com
Kakao Entertainment Announces Genre-Spanning Lineup

Kakao Entertainment enjoyed a highly successful first half of the year, with its Netflix series “The WONDERfools” and “Boyfriend on Demand” hitting global home runs with their distinctive narratives. Also building on the recently released suspense drama “Notes from the Last Row,” Kakao Entertainment’s genre-spanning 2026 slate features the upcoming action-comedy “A Bona Fide Killer” and the thriller “Mousetrap,” cementing - Read our full Pop Culture on The Outerhaven .

theouterhaven.net logo
Jun 29 • 7:21 AM EDT • Entertainment • theouterhaven.net
Could GLP-1 Drugs Help You Live Longer?

Experts are intrigued by the theory. Here’s what early research suggests.

nytimes.com logo
Jun 29 • 5:02 AM EDT • Technology • nytimes.com
Could GLP-1 Drugs Help You Live Longer?

Experts are intrigued by the theory. Here’s what early research suggests.

nytimes.com logo
Jun 29 • 5:02 AM EDT • Health • nytimes.com
People are taking allergy and heartburn pills for PMS. Could it work?

Can the mix really help with premenstrual woes? Theoretically, the link between histamine and hormones could explain why the trendy DIY treatment seems to help some women.

npr.org logo
Jun 29 • 5:00 AM EDT • Health • npr.org
High-Signal Publisher
Conservative presidential power expert set to assist investigation into Trump foes

John Yoo — a well-known and, in some legal and political circles, infamous conservative lawyer — will assist a Justice Department investigation that has theorized a yearslong conspiracy against President Donald Trump and is looking at several former high-ranking federal officials.

cnn.com logo
Jun 28 • 11:44 PM EDT • Politics • cnn.com
A day in the life of Nicky Hilton between London and New York

Nicky Hilton, socialite and cofounder of custom jewelry brand theo grace, splits her time between London and NYC. Here's a day in her life.

businessinsider.com logo
Jun 27 • 5:05 AM EDT • Business • businessinsider.com
We almost had a smartphone in the 90s. Why did it fail?

In the early 90’s, a company called General Magic began working on a portable device that would allow people to check email, make phone calls, even play games. It was basically a smartphone. But it never caught on.On today’s show, a theory about why this device failed. General Magic had generous investors, world-class talent and creative freedom. But is it possible what they needed was constraints?Support:Planet Money+Read: Our book: Planet Money: A Guide to the Economic Forces That Shape Your Life Our weekly longform Planet Money newsletterOur weekly Indicator round-up newsletterFollow: InstagramTikTokYouTubeFacebookThis episode was hosted by Erika Beras and Emma Peaslee. It was produced by Emma Peaslee with help from Sam Yellowhorse Kesler and James Sneed. It was edited by Marianne McCune and fact-checked by Charlotte Isidore. It was engineered by Jimmy Keeley with help from Cena Loffredo. Alex Goldmark is Planet Money’s executive producer.

npr.org logo
Jun 26 • 5:30 PM EDT • Technology • npr.org
High-Signal Publisher
From Linchpin to Lever — Part 1: Measuring Trust in Public Health

Learn how local health departments can measure public trust using existing public health tools to strengthen relationships and improve community health outcomes.

khi.org logo
Jun 26 • 1:18 PM EDT • Health • khi.org
Science Can Fully Explain Consciousness? By 326 Theories…

It’s supposed to be a given that machines or brain organoids might be conscious despite not knowing what that is or how it works — but preborn children can’t be…

mindmatters.ai logo
Jun 26 • 12:33 PM EDT • Science • mindmatters.ai
Making Our Own Luck

We are cross-posting a piece that former NIH official Kris Willis wrote for Macroscience. Kris is now the President and Founder of the Woodley Park Institute, for which I’m a board member. Picking winners or hedging bets? Federal science agencies have long wrestled with the question of how to ensure their billions of dollars of grants and contracts result in maximum benefits for Americans. On the surface, it might seem that a goal-oriented, interventionist style of management would be the best policy: prioritize our most pressing problems and distribute funding accordingly.This top-down strategy creates a unique hazard, though: bad choices can send resources in the wrong direction, resulting in slow progress that impedes the delivery of tangible benefits to citizens. Moreover, if decision makers pursue an applied advance when the underlying scientific principles remain poorly understood, they risk costly failures and a loss of support for the research enterprise at large. Examples include Nixon’s 1971 War on Cancer, undertaken on the premise that a cure could be achieved in less than a decade, the drive to build an operational commercial fusion plant by the mid-1990s, and the National Plan to Address Alzheimer’s Disease, which failed to produce the effective treatments and prevention strategies promised by 2025. The contrasting laissez-faire approach is to hedge your bets. If the path to an advance is impossible to predict, then the wisest choice might be to distribute funding to as widely as possible. The main risk of this strategy is that spreading funding thinly may limit the resources available to the most promising research, resulting in the same negative outcomes as the interventionist approach: limited support for the most promising topics, slow progress, and delayed returns. In reality, at science agencies like the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health, program managers navigate between these two extremes, setting some funds aside to target high-priority areas and using the rest to cover the widest possible range of meritorious proposals. This middle path seems like the most rational way to proceed, but it still requires making choices. How much should be set aside for high priority topics? What should those topics be? How should we define merit? Expert opinion can provide a helpful guide, but leading experts can have remarkably different opinions about what matters and what should be prioritized. Moreover, experts and administrators alike can be risk averse, giving an edge to high-profile, well-established concepts. What’s really needed is a data-driven framework to help guide decision-making, one that doesn’t simply repackage prestige or incumbency. Recognizing breakthroughs years in advance Many breakthroughs fail to attract funding or recognition at the earliest stages of development. Katalin Karikó, for example, spent years struggling to win grants for work on mRNA that would eventually win her and Drew Weissman a Nobel Prize. Similar stories can be told about Jim Allison’s groundbreaking studies leading to the development of cancer immunotherapy, Stan Pruisner’s demonstration that prions can self-replicate without DNA, or Robin Warren and Barry Marshall’s proof that Helicobacter pylori, not stress, causes ulcers. Yet at some point, the scientific community recognizes and responds to transformative breakthroughs like these. How does that change happen? And what if science funders could identify the areas that are on the cusp of a breakthrough? Those questions led my collaborators and me to study how scientists responded to past breakthroughs. Based on patterns in that data, we developed a means of predicting future breakthroughs, using biomedicine as a proof of concept. It’s worth taking a moment to describe how our approach works. Briefly, our prediction process begins by grouping the 18 million or so peer-reviewed papers in PubMed, the authoritative database of biomedical research, into roughly 50,000 unique topics. A small subset of these topics are so widely acclaimed as breakthroughs that they have been recognized with a major prize like a Nobel or a Lasker Award. We theorized that studying the development of these outliers over time, especially before they gained acclaim, was the key to identifying future instances of them. After defining topics, we chose 21 representative breakthroughs and asked what they looked like before they won prestigious prizes. To answer that question, we re-ran our topic-mapping algorithm repeatedly, winding back the clock one year each time, stringing together the years to follow the progress of each field as it grew and advanced. We found that in each case, the years leading up to a discovery followed a pattern: a burst of papers on a new, rapidly evolving topic, many of which quickly became influential. These characteristics—the percent of papers that are new, the percentage of papers that are brought in from other topics, and the influence of each individual paper—can all be measured separately for any given topic. Together, they act as a predictive signal that is detectable an average of five years before a transformative discovery is made, and up to thirty years before the discovery receives a major prize. Scanning the current research landscape for topics that display this signal allows us to predict what work will likely produce a future breakthrough. Each year we analyzed includes four or five signals, a number that appears to have remained constant across a twenty year time frame. In their classic work on the sociology of science, Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar established that the desire to participate in a major discovery is an important motivator for scientists as they consider whether they should take up (or abandon) a research problem. Although further work is needed, the simplest explanation for our results is that this behavior is widespread enough to detect at scale. A foundational advance, or something like it, draws the attention of scientists and causes them to change the direction of their research. They vote with their feet, staking their own reputation and careers by publishing on and citing the new idea. That upswell of interest is the foundation of our breakthrough signal. What kind of research does our model identify as a breakthrough? After building a model based on the patterns in our 21 preselected breakthroughs, we tested it by identifying all early signals of discovery from 1994 through 1997. Of the 18 signals we found in that time period, 17 can be traced forward in time to a breakthrough. Examples include super-resolution fluorescence microscopy (see the image above), the directed evolution of proteins and enzymes (Chemistry Nobel, 2018), and sequencing the human genome (National Medal of Science, 2008). The discovery of the role of leptin signaling in obesity is a particularly interesting case study. Around 1950, scientists noticed the existence of a type of lab mouse that suffered from a unique inherited form of obesity. When given the freedom to choose their own diet, these mice ate more than normal and preferred food that was high in fat. Researchers had few clues as to why the animals overate; early experiments pointed to the existence of a soluble ob factor found circulating in the bloodstream that regulated appetite, but its identity was unknown. In 1994, Jeffrey Friedman and colleagues identified and sequenced the ob gene, noting that the protein it encoded appeared to fit the profile of a circulating factor. A year later, a trio of high-profile publications demonstrated that ob was a hormone that regulated body weight and fat deposition by regulating appetite. One of these was co-authored by Friedman, who christened it leptin from the ancient Greek word for thin. Using our model, the data from 1996 make it clear this advance would become a breakthrough. Scientists had flocked to study the biology of the new hormone, generating the flurry of new papers and citations required to produce a signal. One of these demonstrated that serum leptin concentrations reflected the amount of adipose tissue in the human body, providing clinical validation of the earlier mouse studies. Before the identification of leptin, scientists were unable to point to a specific molecule that controlled appetite and adiposity, so that it was impossible to rule out non-physiological causes of obesity; its characterization fundamentally changed our concept of weight gain. In 2010, Friedman and fellow pioneer Douglas Coleman were awarded a Lasker for the discovery. Our work also identifies breakthroughs in clinical practice and behavioral and social sciences, even though these areas are less likely to draw the attention of major prize committees. One example that falls into this category is the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair, a minimally invasive surgical procedure for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm, a leading cause of death among Americans over the age of 65. Relative to the previous standard of care, it reduces in-hospital mortality by almost four-fold. In 2017, Timothy Chuter received the American College of Surgeons’ prestigious Jacobsen Innovation award for his multiple refinements to the technique. Another under-recognized breakthrough identified by our model is the development of standardized survey instruments to assess the quality of life for HIV+ patients. The antiretroviral cocktails introduced in the mid-1990s reduced AIDS mortality, but treatment came with serious side effects. The new evaluations showed that patients whose disease progressed had worse physical functioning than Americans with other chronic diseases, while those who were asymptomatic maintained a health-related quality of life on par with the overall US population. This evidence made it possible for patients and activists to argue that even in the absence of a total cure, and in spite of the side effects, alleviation of symptoms was a worthwhile priority for clinicians. My colleagues and I have failed to identify any significant recognition for the physicians and health policy experts who pioneered this advance, although in 2016, researchers called for the World Health Organization to set targets for good health-related quality of life as part of its framework to end the AIDS pandemic. From forecasting to funding How should science funders use our predictions? Any serious discussion of what we should do with this new capability needs to begin with an understanding of its limitations. We can’t (and shouldn’t) invest all of our resources in the small number of topics predicted to produce breakthroughs. Innovative new fields are born from existing ones; they rarely arise de novo. If funders don’t maintain a diverse portfolio, the breakthroughs of tomorrow will have no antecedents. Think of this as eating the seed corn, or killing the goose that lays the golden egg. There are also multiple goals of funding beyond basic scientific discovery, including translating discoveries into clinical practice, developing new technologies, supporting economic development, and training new scientists. The investments needed to accomplish these goals are likely different from those required to support emerging breakthroughs. Finally, we must be aware that we may not capture every instance of a breakthrough. The concept is fuzzy, and not every significant discovery is recognized with a major award. Further, breakthroughs are rare, meaning that our dataset is, by necessity, small. This makes formal estimates of accuracy challenging. Although our overall success rate appears to be high, any one signal may turn out to be a false positive. We found one apparent example: the development of the third generation COX-2 inhibitors, Vioxx and Celebrex, which were much celebrated in the early 2000s as effective but non-addictive pain relievers, meets all the algorithmic criteria of a breakthrough. Five years after it received FDA approval, researchers demonstrated that Vioxx was associated with serious cardiovascular complications, and the manufacturer voluntarily pulled the drug from the market. Celebrex remains available, although like other NSAIDs, it carries an FDA warning for increased cardiovascular risk. Decision makers who were overly focused on the breakthrough potential of this research might have wasted substantial resources nurturing an area that ultimately proved to be a failure—but so would those who relied on expert opinion at the time. That said, the potential benefits of funding the next mRNA vaccine or cancer immunotherapy years earlier than we might have are large. When we can’t assume the outcome of an action, it’s worth conducting an experiment. Can targeted support for areas that are poised to produce a breakthrough increase the return on scientific investment without cannibalizing future advances? With the necessary administrative infrastructure in place, conducting this experiment would be straightforward. First, identify all the breakthrough signals between 2018 and 2023, select half at random, and commit to a decade of investment. For biomedicine, a six year window should yield about 30 topics with the potential to produce a breakthrough. Providing strong support to half of these might be accomplished for $300 million a year. That’s roughly half of the recent annual budget of the NIH Common Fund or around 20% of the fiscal year 2025 budget for ARPA-H. After five years, then again at ten, compare to see which group — the one that was actively managed, or the control — produced more breakthroughs, and on what timescale. Although we used biomedicine as an example, the same experiment could just as well be run for physics, materials science, or any other discipline. Any attempt to undertake such an experiment should keep three points top of mind. First, we can predict the topic of future breakthroughs, but the people and vision for how to move the work forward are still important. In practice, this means success requires active program managers with the expertise to develop the science and the authority to do so, including by recruiting investigators. Second, we would be wise to learn from the failures of past attempts to fund transformative research. High among these are funding modestly repackaged work, confusing the genuinely novel with the merely unfamiliar, and relying too much on incumbent investigators. All of these risks can be mitigated by thoroughly and intelligently integrating high quality data into portfolio management. Finally, we need to have patience. Even with strong funding support, producing a breakthrough takes time. If supporting breakthroughs is the best way to nurture the birth of new fields, we also need to accurately describe and properly manage the other two stages, so that we invest wisely throughout the productive lifetime of ideas and divest once they reach the point of diminishing returns. We would benefit from more study of all of these phases, especially the transition from one to another. More research could answer questions like: When does a breakthrough become an established field? How do the availability of funding, the size and characteristics of the available workforce, and the accumulation of evidence that disagrees with prevailing models affect a field’s decline? Exactly how do old ideas give birth to new ones, and can we speed up the process? The more we understand about the dynamics of scientific progress, the better we can maximize the odds that our curiosity leads to results. I’d call that finding a way to make our own luck.

goodscience.substack.com logo
Jun 25 • 4:48 PM EDT • Science • goodscience.substack.com
Deep dive
😐 Neutral (10%)
wow
42%
ahah
33%
love
25%
Scientists observe water switching between 2 different molecular structures, boosting decades-old theory

For decades, scientists suspected water secretly behaves like two different liquids. A new AI-powered study has finally caught it happening at the molecular level.

yahoo.com logo
Jun 24 • 1:04 PM EDT • Science • yahoo.com
Roku May Help Fox Avoid Aggregeddon

(Welcome to the “Most Important Story of the Week”, my bi-weekly strategy column analyzing the most important (but often not buzziest) news story of the last two weeks. I’m the Entertainment Strategy Guy, a former streaming executive who now analyzes business strategy in the entertainment industry. Please subscribe.) Scrolling through links over the last week, I stumbled across this fun headline: Wow. Formula 1 (the sport, not the docu-series) is the perfect “dog not barking”. As a reminder, each week in my Streaming Ratings Report, I call out the shows that miss every viewership chart. I dub them “dogs not barking”—like the Sherlock Holmes mystery—because without any data, we forget they even exist. This is in contrast to something like, say, a film flop—cough The Mandalorian and Grogu cough—where even underperforming at the box office is widely discussed here, there and everywhere. In the US, Formula 1 is now in “no public viewership data, so not discussed” territory. After moving to Apple TV from its former home of ESPN, basically no one talks about it. Apple did publish an initial, unsourced, unsubstantiated, (dare I say unserious) datecdote claiming more folks are watching Formula 1 on Apple than ESPN, but we haven’t gotten any updates since. This stands in contrast to when the sport streamed on ESPN, and ESPN PR provided weekly viewership figures. Formula 1 was, at best, a niche sport in America—averaging 1.3 million viewers in the Big Data Plus era—but now it’s basically anonymous. (And yeah, after moving to Apple, I very, very, very much doubt its ratings increased.) Unfortunately, that story isn’t quite big enough to warrant a section in today’s “Most Important Story of the Week” column, but I wanted to call it out, because otherwise, no one else will! Certainly, no one will write articles about the silence/ratings decline, unlike when they wrote breathless articles connecting the rise in viewership to Netflix’s Drive to Survive, including Reuters just last month. (This is a topic I’ve tried to provide a moderate/nuanced/non-hyped take since 2022.) Anyway, on to this week’s issue. I was a bit worried I didn’t have a juicy topic, then the Murdochs went out and did their Murdoch thing: buying Roku. So that’s the story of the week, and it happens to touch on quite a few themes of the streaming wars and the disruption therein. I’ll cover that, plus why more consolidation in Hollywood media looks likely, more good news on the Hollywood labor front, whether we’ll see an uptick in production in Los Angeles, some Broadway and theme park news, cellphone prices going up in the third world (and possibly everywhere), and more. Subscribe Most Important Story of the Week - Another Big Media & Entertainment Merger The story of the week is clearly Fox is buying Roku for $22 billion. I read a lot of good strategy takes on why Fox bought this streaming TV device maker—and I’ll have mine below—but what fascinates me more is how this deal connects to quite a few themes of the streaming wars, linking to everything from the pace of M&A to “aggregeddon” to Netflix’s recent M&A actions/inactions to the shift to advertising from pure play streaming and more. The only topic I can’t really connect it to is my old theory, “never bet against Rupert Murdoch” because he isn’t the one who did this deal; his son Lachlan inked it. (Do I think he provided advice, even at his 95 years of age? Sure.) That plus I have one additional piece of strategy for all entertainment players, inspired by this deal. So let’s dive into all those topics, starting with why I like this deal. Roku is a Great M&A Buy

entertainment.substack.com logo
Jun 23 • 2:23 PM EDT • Entertainment • entertainment.substack.com
A scientist says he can scan prisoners’ brains for signs of evil. Did his disputed science put a man on death row?

Kent Kiehl convinced the US legal system he can find violence in prisoners’ brains. His theories have been since used by defense lawyers – with grave consequences for prisoners

theguardian.com logo
Jun 23 • 12:00 PM EDT • Science • theguardian.com
9 of the best technology conspiracy theories

From covert government surveillance to wireless signals transmitting viruses, tech-centric conspiracy theories have been propagating wildly in recent years. Most of them are completely unfounded — but not all.

livescience.com logo
Jun 23 • 5:30 AM EDT • Science • livescience.com
Princeton joins powerhouse network for theoretical physics with major gift from the Leinweber Foundation

With this gift, Princeton will become the ninth member of the Leinweber network for theoretical physics, which is focused on advancing curiosity-driven research on the theoretical principles underlying the physical universe.

princeton.edu logo
Jun 22 • 6:59 AM EDT • Science • princeton.edu
Scientists thought they knew what's lurking at the centre of our Galaxy. But they may have been completely wrong this whole time | BBC Sky at Night Magazine

Could the supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way Galaxy be dark matter instead? Exploring the science behind the theory.

skyatnightmagazine.com logo
Jun 22 • 5:08 AM EDT • Science • skyatnightmagazine.com
Science Writer Takes Aim at Many Universes Theory

What these speculations point to is the way new findings have destroyed classical materialism. Materialism isn’t so much dying out as breaking up.

mindmatters.ai logo
Jun 21 • 3:31 PM EDT • Science • mindmatters.ai
Deep dive
😐 Neutral (9%)
ahah
66%
wow
34%
The surprising science of how fatherhood changes the brain

Recent studies suggest that, like mothers, fathers may undergo a profound shift in their biology and brains in preparation for and response to the responsibilities of parenthood.

theoaklandpress.com logo
Jun 21 • 7:32 AM EDT • Science • theoaklandpress.com
Algae, peeling blue material, conspiracy theories: Reflecting Pool takes national spotlight

Earlier this year, President Donald Trump described the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool as “absolutely filthy,” vowing to clean up the iconic landmark and make it “look gorgeous, beautiful” so it again reflects the federal monuments around it.

cnn.com logo
Jun 20 • 12:00 PM EDT • Politics • cnn.com
Colman Domingo explains his 'wild' theory about Hitchcock classic 'Rear Window'

Colman Domingo doesn't play about his favorite films, but he does hold one playful theory about the best of his best — 'Rear Window,' which blew the mind of TCM host Ben Mankiewicz.

ew.com logo
Jun 19 • 12:15 PM EDT • Entertainment • ew.com
Colman Domingo explains his 'wild' theory about Hitchcock classic “Rear Window”

Plus, the "Disclosure Day" star tells TCM why he considers Jimmy Stewart his "North Star as an actor."

yahoo.com logo
Jun 19 • 12:15 PM EDT • Entertainment • yahoo.com
WCC publishes “HIV and Mental Health: What Can the Church Do?”

The World Council of Churches (WCC) has published “HIV and Mental Health: What Can the Church Do?” by Dr Sue Parry, a practical and theologically grounded resource for congregations ready to respond to one of the most complex pastoral challenges of our time.

oikoumene.org logo
Jun 18 • 8:00 PM EDT • Health • oikoumene.org
Baby crocodile-like fossils just blew up a long-held evolution theory

Turns out, the first animals to walk on land weren't amphibians.

popsci.com logo
Jun 18 • 2:00 PM EDT • Science • popsci.com
New science advisory council forms to help US government ‘resolve the UAP mystery’

Theoretical physicist and Harvard University Professor Avi Loeb shared early details about the new UAP Science Advisory Council.

defensescoop.com logo
Jun 17 • 5:31 PM EDT • Science • defensescoop.com
Deep dive
😐 Neutral (16%)
wow
51%
love
26%
ahah
23%
Richard Tapia, Mathematician Who Pushed to Diversify His Field, Dies at 88

A math whiz as a young man, he later blazed trails, both with his theoretical advances and his advocacy for minority students.

nytimes.com logo
Jun 17 • 1:16 PM EDT • Science • nytimes.com
A Deadly Outbreak of Plague, Nearly 5,000 Years Before the Black Death

The oldest known cases, discovered among hunter-gatherers in Siberian graves, contradict the theory that the disease once was mild.

nytimes.com logo
Jun 17 • 11:00 AM EDT • Science • nytimes.com
The Unitary Executive Takes Over New Territory

The Trump administration's theory of how the federal government should work is a threat to American science.

theatlantic.com logo
Jun 17 • 10:41 AM EDT • Science • theatlantic.com
Holiday Inn Clarksville Northeast Showcases New Amenities During Chamber Business After Hours - Clarksville Online - Clarksville News, Sports, Events and Information

Clarksville, TN - “Today, I think we're hosting our 4th Business after Hours in our Holiday Inn Burger Theory restaurant,” GM Patricia Allende said.

clarksvilleonline.com logo
Jun 17 • 7:00 AM EDT • Business • clarksvilleonline.com
How you use AI could weaken brain defense against dementia: researcher

"How you use AI, not how often, will determine its impact," Vivienne Ming, a theoretical neuroscientist and AI researcher told Business Insider.

businessinsider.com logo
Jun 17 • 6:58 AM EDT • Business • businessinsider.com
The Courtroom Battle Over Baby Formula Isn’t About Science

A jury in a Cook County, Illinois, court awarded families $70 million in April after concluding that infant formula caused a devastating illness in premature babies. However, that conclusion hinged on a scientific theory that lacks validated evidence. While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said its recent study of chemical contamination in infant formula produced by Abbott Laboratories … Continue reading "The Courtroom Battle Over Baby Formula Isn’t About Science"

thewellnews.com logo
Jun 16 • 4:39 PM EDT • Science • thewellnews.com
Rumor: Xbox Planning to Close South of Midnight & Hellblade Studios

Compulsion Games, Ninja Theory, and Double Fine are talking with Microsoft to find another way, it is said.

80.lv logo
Jun 16 • 8:24 AM EDT • Technology • 80.lv
Microsoft reportedly negotiating closures of multiple Xbox studios, including Psychonauts' Double Fine, South of Midnight's Compulsion and Hellblade's Ninja Theory

The expected Xbox restructuring and lay-offs reportedly include potential closures for three well known games studios.

eurogamer.net logo
Jun 16 • 5:10 AM EDT • Technology • eurogamer.net
Promoter of election conspiracy theories wins GOP primary for Nevada secretary of state

Former state lawmaker Jim Marchant has won the Republican nomination for Nevada secretary of state

washingtonpost.com logo
Jun 15 • 9:42 PM EDT • Politics • washingtonpost.com
Xbox is closing down Hellblade creator Ninja Theory

The future of Senua, which Xbox just announced, is unclear.

theverge.com logo
Jun 15 • 5:13 PM EDT • Technology • theverge.com
Xbox is reportedly considering closing South of Midnight studio, Compulsion Games, with Double Fine and Ninja Theory also allegedly at risk

Xbox is allegedly shuttering We Happy Few and South of Midnight developer, Compulsion Games, with Tim Schafer's Double …

gamesindustry.biz logo
Jun 15 • 5:00 PM EDT • Technology • gamesindustry.biz
“The Big Bang Theory ”cast: See Jim Parsons, Kaley Cuoco, and their brainy costars, then and now

The stars have continued to make waves in film, television, and theater — among other career milestones.

yahoo.com logo
Jun 15 • 2:00 PM EDT • Entertainment • yahoo.com
Requiem Creative Wins Multiple Golden Trailer Awards, Earns Clio Entertainment Honors, and Emerges as One of Entertainment Marketing’s Fastest-Rising Agencies

Rapidly growing entertainment marketing agency recognized across theatrical, streaming, television, gaming, music, and digital campaigns less than two years after launchLOS ANGELES, June 15, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Requiem Creative, the Los Angeles-based entertainment marketing agency operating within the Ramsey Theory Group portfolio, today announced a series of major industry accolades, including Golden Trailer Awards wins, Clio Entertainment finalist honors, and numerous nominations spanning

finance.yahoo.com logo
Jun 15 • 10:10 AM EDT • Entertainment • finance.yahoo.com
Xbox Game Studios boss Craig Duncan steps down

The head of Xbox Game Studios Craig Duncan has stepped down after more than 18 months in the role. Duncan replaced former Studios boss Alan Hartman in November 2024, and oversaw Halo Studios, The Coalition, Flight Sim, Turn 10, Playground Games, Rare, Obsidian, Ninja Theory, Compulsion Games, The Initiative, Double Fine, InXile, Undead Labs, World’s Edge and XGS Publishing. He departs the organization this week. His studios will report to Xbox Chief Content Officer Matt Booty until a replacement is found. Duncan has been part of the Xbox organization since 2011 and is best known for running highly regarded UK developer Rare for nearly 14 years. He oversaw the developer’s Kinect and Sea of Thieves eras. Prior to that, he held various senior roles at Codemasters, Midway and Sumo Digital, and worked cross titles such as Sonic and Sega All-Stars Racing, Wheelman and Colin McRae. He's also VP of the charity SpecialEffect. Subscribe Meanwhile, Xbox Game Studios chief of staff Louise O’Connor will also be leaving the company. O’Connor joined Rare in 1999 beginning as an animator on cult favourite N64 game Conker’s Bad Fur Day. She’s worked in numerous art and production roles at the UK studio, and even won an AIAS award for voicing the character Leafos in Viva Piñata. She left Rare following the cancellation of Everwild in 2025, before becoming chief of staff in September that year. In an email to staff, Duncan wrote: “When I stepped into the role of leading XGS 20 months ago, my purpose was to serve our studios, our teams, and the people making our games. Together, we set out to deliver high-quality games, strengthen the cultural fabric across our studios, and help shape the future of the business. I’m proud to say we delivered many flawless launches that drove business success for the company.” On O’Connor, he added: “Louise has been a thoughtful, creative, and trusted partner who has consistently championed the craft and supported our studios with clarity and care. I’m grateful for everything she’s brought to XGS, and I’m sure she’ll be successful in whatever comes next for her.”

thegamebusiness.com logo
Jun 15 • 10:07 AM EDT • Technology • thegamebusiness.com
Xbox Game Studios boss Craig Duncan steps down

The head of Xbox Game Studios Craig Duncan has stepped down after more than 18 months in the role. Duncan replaced former Studios boss Alan Hartman in November 2024, and oversaw Halo Studios, The Coalition, Flight Sim, Turn 10, Playground Games, Rare, Obsidian, Ninja Theory, Compulsion Games, The Initiative, Double Fine, InXile, Undead Labs, World’s Edge and XGS Publishing. He departs the organization this week. His studios will report to Xbox Chief Content Officer Matt Booty until a replacement is found. Duncan has been part of the Xbox organization since 2011 and is best known for running highly regarded UK developer Rare for nearly 14 years. He oversaw the developer’s Kinect and Sea of Thieves eras. Prior to that, he held various senior roles at Codemasters, Midway and Sumo Digital, and worked cross titles such as Sonic and Sega All-Stars Racing, Wheelman and Colin McRae. He's also VP of the charity SpecialEffect. Subscribe Meanwhile, Xbox Game Studios chief of staff Louise O’Connor will also be leaving the company. O’Connor joined Rare in 1999 beginning as an animator on cult favourite N64 game Conker’s Bad Fur Day. She’s worked in numerous art and production roles at the UK studio, and even won an AIAS award for voicing the character Leafos in Viva Piñata. She left Rare following the cancellation of Everwild in 2025, before becoming chief of staff in September that year. In an email to staff, Duncan wrote: “When I stepped into the role of leading XGS 20 months ago, my purpose was to serve our studios, our teams, and the people making our games. Together, we set out to deliver high-quality games, strengthen the cultural fabric across our studios, and help shape the future of the business. I’m proud to say we delivered many flawless launches that drove business success for the company.” On O’Connor, he added: “Louise has been a thoughtful, creative, and trusted partner who has consistently championed the craft and supported our studios with clarity and care. I’m grateful for everything she’s brought to XGS, and I’m sure she’ll be successful in whatever comes next for her.”

thegamebusiness.com logo
Jun 15 • 10:07 AM EDT • Business • thegamebusiness.com
New restaurants, businesses coming to downtown Decatur

A few businesses have closed in Decatur, including Orangetheory Fitness and bb.q Chicken on West Ponce de Leon Avenue, but about 11 businesses are slated to open soon in the city.

decaturish.com logo
Jun 15 • 9:00 AM EDT • Business • decaturish.com
Global multipolarity through the lens of network science and game theory

npj Complexity - The “Theory of Competing Networks”, which integrates network science and game theory, reveals that cooperation is more stable than hierarchy, offering insights into...

nature.com logo
Jun 14 • 8:00 PM EDT • Science • nature.com