SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " friedman " 37 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Is Milton Friedman to blame for America’s health care woes?
Health policy experts John McDonough and Stuart Butler debate where the U.S. medical system went wrong — and how to fix it.
NC State Health Plan moves Atrium out-of-network in response to new pricing plan
The move comes a day after a Superior Court judge denied the State Health Plan's request for a temporary restraining order against Atrium's new pricing plan.
Alex DeBrincat Signing Massive Extension With the Red Wings
According to NHL insiders Elliotte Friedman and Chris Johnston, the Detroit Red Wings are on the verge of signing forward Alex DeBrincat to a seven-year extension.Friedman appeared to be the first to break the news, followed just moments later by Johnston.Johnston wrote in a post on X, “Alex DeBrincat scored two goals tonight, and word […] The post Alex DeBrincat Signing Massive Extension With the Red Wings appeared first on HEAVY.
Red Wings Reportedly Closing In on Massive Alex DeBrincat Extension
Elliotte Friedman reports the Detroit Red Wings are nearing a massive seven-year, $91 million contract extension with Alex DeBrincat.
Quentin Tarantino's first stage play will debut in London with Sacha Baron Cohen as star
LONDON (AP) — The latest project from Quentin Tarantino is a swashbuckling stage comedy featuring “Borat” star Sacha Baron Cohen.Sony Pictures Entertainment and Sonia Friedman Productions announced Su...
Quentin Tarantino's First Stage Play Will Debut in London With Sacha Baron Cohen as Star
LONDON (AP) — The latest project from Quentin Tarantino is a swashbuckling stage comedy featuring “Borat” star Sacha Baron Cohen. Sony Pictures Entertainment and Sonia Friedman Productions announced Sunday that the Oscar-winning filmmaker’s first stage play, “The Popinjay Cavalier,” will open in ...
REP LIEU JOINS REP. FRIEDMAN, LOS ANGELES DELEGATION, AND ENTERTAINMENT UNION IN PUSH FOR NATIONAL FILM TAX CREDIT
GLENDALE, CA – Today, October 6, 2026, Congressman Ted Lieu (D-Los Angeles County) joined U.S. Congresswoman Laura Friedman (D-Los Angeles County), Members of the Los Angeles congressional delegation, and the major unions representing film and television workers at the Alex Theatre in a new push for the Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act.
Red Wings Reverse Course in Simon Edvinsson Contract Talks
The Detroit Red Wings have changed course in Simon Edvinsson contract talks, with Elliotte Friedman reporting longer-term offers are now on the table.
Simon Edvinsson Reportedly Prefers Trade From Red Wings
Elliotte Friedman reports Simon Edvinsson prefers to be traded by the Detroit Red Wings as his contract standoff takes a dramatic turn.
Inside Meta's AI success and how Nat Friedman drove Muse's launch
Meta's Muse became an App Store hit after a rocky start for its AI team. Here's how Nat Friedman, new hires, and AI training turned things around.
Power & Politics: Voter registration hearing; New poll on NJ's 7th Congressional District; ICE accused of using Roxbury warehouse
Author of New Jersey Playbook and Politico Reporter Matt Friedman and Founder and Director of Stimsight Research Patrick Murray join the show this week.
Leah Friedman Leads With a People-First Approach
Leah Friedman, executive director of the Ryan Shazier Fund for Spinal Rehabilitation, shares her people-first approach to leadership and service.
Revitalizing Mississippi Food Systems for Health and Equity
Food is Medicine programs and local non-profits are uniting to tackle chronic disease and build more sustainable Mississippi food systems.
Family-owned Westwood business Sarah Leonard Fine Jewelers closes after nearly 80 years
Sarah Leonard Fine Jewelers, one of the oldest family-owned businesses in Westwood, closed Saturday. Sarah “Sunny” Friedman and Leonard “Lenny” Friedman opened the store, located at 1055 Westwood Blvd., in 1946 under the name Crescent Jewelers.
Red Wings GM Search Gets Several Concrete Names
Elliotte Friedman revealed several names connected to the Red Wings GM search, including Brett Peterson, Jeff Kealty and Jeff Greenberg.
Preventative measures to take in navigating postpartum and postpartum psychosis
Orthopedic services expand in Duplin County as ECU Health strengthens Kenansville practice
ECU Health says they are expanding orthopedic services in Duplin County with the addition of Dr. Robert Friedman at ECU Health Orthopedics – Kenansville.Friedma
Shohei Ohtani Injury Won’t Effect Deadline Plans, Says Friedman
Los Angeles Dodgers president of baseball operations Andrew Friedman said the Shohei Ohtani's injury won't impact their deadline plans.
Agent Business Models May Be Shifting: What I Fear Will Happen
When the new AALA Canon of Ethics goes into effect, authors must be more diligent and sharp in evaluating who they partner with.
Politics Unusual: Rep. Kean Jr.'s return to Congress, Sherrill's first 6 months
In this episode of Politics Unusual, FOX 5 NY's Teresa Priolo speaks to The New York Times reporter Tracey Tully about Rep. Tom Kean Jr.'s return to Congress after revealing his struggles with depression. Also, a conversation with POLITICO reporter Matt Friedman.
NC State Health Plan raises premiums, offers new tiered benefits that could help members cut costs
The N.C. State Health Plan's Board of Trustees voted Friday morning to raise premiums for many of its 770,000 members.
Rangers Land 37-Goal Star In Blockbuster Trade With Vegas
The New York Rangers have added a new star forward to their roster.According to TSN’s Darren Dreger, the Rangers have acquired forward Pavel Dorofeyev from the Vegas Golden Knights.Sportnet’s Elliotte Friedman later added that the Rangers are sending the 26th pick of the 2026 Entry Draft, the 92nd pick of this year’s draft, and their […] The post Rangers Land 37-Goal Star In Blockbuster Trade With Vegas appeared first on HEAVY.
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.
Elliotte Friedman Shares Latest on Oilers' Pursuit of Mike Babcock
NHLPA review complicates Edmonton Oilers' reported Mike Babcock pursuit.
NC State Health Plan board approves Medicare Advantage plan benefit changes despite retiree concerns
Retirees on the state's Medicare Advantage will face higher out-of-pocket maximums next year, as well as higher copays for many medical services.
NC State Health Plan leaders say WakeMed-Atrium merger could cause premium increases
State Health Plan Executive Administrator Tom Friedman said Atrium charges between 15 and 40 percent more for services. If WakeMed adopts those reimbursement rates, the impact could ripple across hundreds of thousands of employees.
NC State Health Plan to propose benefit structure aimed at shifting care to 'preferred providers'
The new structure is necessary, plan administrators say, because costs are continue to outpace premiums. Those premiums are likely to increase next year.
Anthropic Nears $1.5 Billion Joint Venture With Wall Street Firms
Anthropic, Blackstone and Hellman & Friedman each expected to invest around $300 million; Goldman Sachs also an investor.
How to Build a Superteam That Keeps Getting Better
In periods of rapid change, the teams that outperform everyone else are not those with the best plans or the most talent but those that learn the fastest. Research across thousands of teams reveals a consistent pattern: High-performing teams—“superteams”—build cultures of continuous improvement. Their leaders encourage experimentation even when things are going well, make curiosity and intellectual humility contagious, surface problems early, stay close to the work, give feedback that supports learning rather than punishing mistakes, and invest in people’s growth even when it doesn’t pay off immediately. When work is tied to shared meaning and progress matters more than perfection, teams become more resilient, adaptable, and capable of sustained success—in business settings and beyond.
Is Dodgers’ Andrew Friedman a global business icon? In Japan, he is
What could Japanese teams learn from how Andrew Friedman leads the Dodgers? This is what the inquiring mind of Hideki Kuriyama, Shohei Ohtani's former manager, wanted to know.
Rep. Friedman on the state of the entertainment industry and the Iran conflict
Rep. Friedman was presented with the ADG President’s Award
Rep. Friedman on the state of the entertainment industry and the Iran conflict
Rep. Friedman was presented with the ADG President’s Award
Friedman, Schiff seek commitments to protect Hollywood jobs amid WBD acquisition
Media giants Netflix and Paramount are making their sales pitches to take over Warner Brothers Discovery, and it's caught the attention of Capitol Hill.
Opinion | How a Conservative Texas District Rejected the Politics of Division
Many Americans are growing both exhausted and frightened by Trump’s scorched-earth, hyperpartisan, fire-ready-aim approach to the presidency.
Sunday Standings: Time to believe?
Over the summer, a respected voice like Elliotte Friedman really drove home a lot of feelings about the Pittsburgh Penguins in a podcast: “It’s really hard to make deals right now because there are 31 teams in the NHL attempting to get better….then there is Pittsburgh” Turns out the signings of players like Anthony Mantha, […]
Opinion | Trump’s Politics Are Not America First. They’re Me First.
Donald Trump is the most un-American president in our history. And in his second term, there is no one to constrain his un-American impulses.
Small business advocate Ron Friedman remembered for impact in Corning, Elmira
Friends called Elmira business owner and Corning resident Ron Friedman a dynamic force to be reckoned with.