Home Blog Page 436

Scientists reveal why some workout recovery tricks can backfire

Admin
-
0
Scientists reveal why some workout recovery tricks can backfire

Finishing a tough workout always feels good. That is, until a few hours later when those uncomfortable muscle aches start setting in. This discomfort can linger for days – making easy, everyday tasks a challenge.

In search of relief, some recreational gym-goers are adopting the kind of recovery techniques once reserved for elite athletes. Social media and professional sport have helped popularize everything from ice baths and compression garments to massage and recovery supplements.

While many of these products promise faster recovery, reduced soreness and improved performance, the science is often more nuanced.

Ice baths

Few recovery strategies have received as much attention as ice baths. This involves immersing oneself in water that is below 15°C to boost recovery. But the evidence for this benefit is mixed.

Ice baths help ease inflammation, which research suggests can reduce muscle soreness and help athletes recover muscle function more effectively in a 24-hour period.

But there’s a catch. While inflammation causes soreness, it also triggers adaptations that build muscle. Dampening this response with ice baths may limit some of the long-term benefits of training – particularly if they’re used regularly.

When it comes to ice baths, side-stepping short-term pain may sacrifice long-term gains. It’s best to only use them when rapid recovery is vital.

Compression garments

Compression garments are commonly worn after exercise to speed recovery. The idea is that the external pressure they apply supports circulation, enhances blood flow to the muscles, and reduces swelling.

But while compression garments might make you think they’re helping as they reduce soreness, evidence showing they actually improve muscle recovery is generally less convincing.

A study from 2022 put them to the test. One group was given compression garments; the other group was given a placebo tablet that they were told was equally as effective as compression.

The compression garments were shown to improve circulation and muscle blood flow, while the placebo had no effect on these measures. This suggests the effects of compression garments on recovery are physiological and aren’t simply due to expectation or perception.

However, whether these changes meaningfully improve performance is less clear. Although emerging evidence suggests compression garments genuinely affect some markers of recovery, this is unlikely to directly restore muscle function.

So, compression garments may mainly help because they make you feel better recovered.

Massage

Massage is one of the few recovery interventions with relatively consistent scientific support. It can reduce soreness and improve perceived recovery after exercise.

It’s not currently clear what mechanisms actually trigger the recovery benefits of massage. But it could be due to the fact that massage reduces muscle stiffness, improves circulation and boosts relaxation.

But although athletes feel less sore and perceptions of recovery are improved after a massage, objective measures of performance and muscle function are modest and inconsistent.

Massage might ease the discomfort of training, but don’t expect miraculous performance restoration.

Recovery supplements

The nutrition supplement market is a big business, with hundreds of brightly coloured recovery drinks and capsules promising reduced soreness and faster recovery. But not all supplements are created equal. Some appear to confer small benefits, while some come with hype that science doesn’t back up.

Whey protein, for instance, is a well-researched supplement. Rich in amino acids (the building blocks of protein), it stimulates muscle protein synthesis – the process which helps your muscles grow. Whey protein is shown to have small-to-moderate benefits for muscle recovery – but evidence that it can alleviate soreness is inconsistent.

Branch chain amino acids (BCAAs) are widely-used supplements that typically contain a mixture of the amino acids leucine, isoleucine and valine. BCAAs are popular because it’s believed the leucine they contain switches on protein synthesis.

Yet despite their popularity, BCAAs appear less effective than complete protein sources for muscle recovery. This is because muscle repair requires all essential amino acids – not just the ones found in BCAAs. Food sources such as chicken, beef, salmon and tofu contain all the essential amino acids.

Tart cherry juice is a relatively new supplement in the fitness world. It’s rich in polyphenols – plant compounds that are said to have anti-inflammatory and antioxidant (reducing or preventing cell damage) effects. It’s for these reasons that tart cherry juice is thought to help reduce muscle damage and soreness.

Although this is still an emerging area of research, evidence suggests these compounds have small-to-moderate effects on reducing soreness after workouts, and may also help restore muscular strength and power.

Omega-3 (fish oil) supplements are often championed as a way to reduce inflammation and accelerate recovery after exercise. While some research suggests they can modestly reduce muscle soreness and help preserve muscle function after strenuous exercise, results are far from consistent. As such, omega-3 supplements are unlikely to vastly improve recovery.

Importantly, all of these nutrients can be obtained from a healthy, balanced diet. Science also shows that it’s better to get these nutrients from whole foods over expensive supplements, as whole foods provide other important nutrients that may interact synergistically to support health.

What actually works?

Popular recovery techniques might have small benefits for reducing feelings of soreness, but they don’t actually tend to restore muscle function all that much. Instead, the strongest evidence for good recovery comes from the basics:

  1. Prioritize sleep: Get 7-9 hours of sleep per night so the body can conduct vital recovery and adaptive processes.
  2. Fuel properly: Consume 20-40g of protein after exercise for muscle repair and adequate carbohydrate intake to replenish energy stores.
  3. Train smart: Pair good sleep and nutrition with a sensible, well-structured training plan. This includes allowing rest days between sessions, challenging yourself a bit more each time, and scheduling easier sessions when needed to allow recovery.

So, perhaps the biggest lesson here is that recovery cannot be bottled and sold.science The Conversation

Read More

Cornell scientists identify rare human genetic disorder in two unusually long-legged cats

Admin
-
0
Cornell scientists identify rare human genetic disorder in two unusually long-legged cats

news

Two brothers named Gary and Shaggy have helped Cornell University researchers make a rare genetic discovery. In a study published in Scientific Reports, scientists reported the first molecular characterization of Marfan syndrome in domestic cats, a condition primarily recognized in humans.

Gary and Shaggy first stood out as kittens because of their unusually long limbs. As they grew older, veterinarians also identified abnormalities in their eye structures and an enlarged aorta, the body’s main artery. Together, these symptoms suggested Marfan syndrome, an inherited condition that weakens connective tissues throughout the body. The disorder affects approximately 1 in 4,000 people, but these brothers represented the first known documented feline cases.

“The findings provide a foundation for improved veterinary diagnostics,” said senior author Dr. Jacquelyn Evans, assistant professor in the College of Veterinary Medicine and at the Baker Institute for Animal Health. “It can help veterinarians recognize similar cases in the future and may help develop genetic tests.”

Scientists Uncover a Surprising Genetic Twist

To determine what caused the brothers’ unusual symptoms, researchers from multiple disciplines conducted thorough medical examinations and analyzed their DNA. Their investigation identified changes in a gene called FBN1, which provides instructions for producing fibrillin-1. This protein is essential for healthy connective tissue, helping support structures throughout the body, including blood vessels, bones, ligaments, skin, and eyes.

Genetic testing revealed that Gary and Shaggy each had two altered copies of FBN1, having inherited one from each parent. This was especially notable because, in humans, a mutation in just one copy of the gene can be enough to cause Marfan syndrome. Having two altered copies is exceptionally uncommon and can severely disrupt the production of normal fibrillin-1.

Yet the brothers’ genetic changes had an unexpected effect. Further analysis showed that their particular variant did not completely disable the gene. Instead, it interfered with how the gene’s instructions were processed while still allowing some normal activity to continue. That remaining function helps explain why Gary and Shaggy were able to survive into adulthood, even though carrying two copies of such a mutation could otherwise have resulted in a much more severe form of the disorder.

Read More

The secret to easier exercise as an adult may start in childhood

Admin
-
0
The secret to easier exercise as an adult may start in childhood

news

How much energy your body needs to move as an adult could be influenced by how active you were during childhood. A new study led by researchers at Penn State suggests that physical activity early in life may have lasting effects on movement efficiency. Using birds as a model, the scientists provided the first direct evidence that experiences during development can change how much energy animals expend when moving as adults.

According to Jonas Rubenson, a professor of kinesiology at Penn State, the ability to move efficiently could play an important role in animal evolution. Animals that spend less energy getting around may have more resources available for essential activities such as finding food, hunting, and reproducing. The findings, published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Biological Sciences, suggest that the energy demands of movement are more adaptable than scientists previously believed.

To investigate, the researchers attached small weights to one leg of young guinea fowl, birds closely related to chickens that walk on two legs like humans. They wanted to determine whether carrying extra weight during development would change how efficiently the birds moved once they matured.

The results revealed a striking difference. Birds that grew up carrying the weights could walk with the added load without expending additional energy. By comparison, birds raised without weights required 23% more energy when the same load was attached to their legs.

“This study showed how limb loading — the application of mechanical stress on arms or legs, typically through weights or exercise — during development can help an animal save energy during movement throughout its lifespan,” said Rubenson, senior author of the study. “This is one of the first studies to indicate that animals’ behaviors and environments in youth can affect how effortful moving is as adults.”

Why Childhood Exercise Could Matter for Lifelong Health

Although the experiment involved birds, the findings raise important questions about human physical activity. One widely accepted scientific hypothesis proposes that people tend to avoid movement when it feels physically demanding or requires substantial energy.

If early activity influences movement efficiency in humans as it does in these birds, people who were less active during childhood might need to expend more energy to perform the same movements as adults. That additional effort could make them less inclined to exercise, potentially reinforcing a pattern of inactivity.

Rubenson believes the discovery could have broad implications for public health, particularly as children today are generally less physically active than those in earlier generations.

“Overall, children in the U.S. today are much less active than previous generations,” Rubenson said. “This study suggests that more exercise through play and exercise during childhood could make it easier for people to remain or become more active as adults. If people do not need to exert as much energy to move as adults, then exercise — and all its health benefits — will be more accessible to them. This could have implications for many aspects of our nation’s well-being, from heart health to mental health.”

How Researchers Tested the Effects of Early Exercise

The experiment followed 12 guinea fowl from two weeks of age until they reached 16 weeks, when the birds were approaching their full adult size.

Half of the birds wore lead bands on one leg, with each band weighing 4% of the bird’s body weight. The remaining six birds developed without any added weight. Apart from this difference, all 12 animals experienced the same living conditions and exercise routines.

When the birds reached nine weeks of age, the researchers began training them to walk on a treadmill.

At 16 weeks, the team assessed their energy expenditure using a flow-through metabolic chamber fitted to the treadmill. This equipment measured the oxygen each bird consumed, along with the carbon dioxide and water vapor it released. According to the researchers, this approach is considered the gold standard for determining how much energy an animal uses during a particular activity.

Each bird was tested under three conditions: standing still, walking on the treadmill without added weight, and walking while wearing a weight band on one leg. By comparing oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production across these conditions, the scientists could determine how the additional load affected energy use.

Early Training Produced a Surprising Energy-Saving Effect

The researchers found no differences in energy consumption when the birds were standing still. However, their responses changed considerably once they began walking with weights.

Birds that had not carried weights while growing up experienced a 23% increase in energy expenditure when walking with the added load compared with walking without it.

The birds that had worn weights throughout development showed a remarkably different response. Their bodies had adapted so effectively that walking with the extra load required slightly less energy than walking without it. This unexpected result surprised the research team.

“The birds became so efficient that they were not using any more energy to carry the weight than they needed to walk without the weight,” Rubenson said.

Another unexpected finding emerged when the researchers compared the two groups. On average, birds accustomed to carrying weights throughout development used no more energy while walking with their bands than ordinary birds used when walking without any added weight.

Together, these observations suggest that experiences early in life can substantially influence how efficiently animals move as adults.

“This shows that animals — and this probably includes humans — can become more efficient based on their life experiences. So, when humans exercise regularly throughout our childhood and adolescence, it could build our capacity for exercise throughout our lives.”

The findings provide new evidence that physical activity during development can have lasting effects on the energy required for movement. Whether the same adaptations occur in humans remains to be established, but the research suggests a potential mechanism through which childhood exercise could help support physical activity later in life.

Research Team and Funding

Stephen Piazza, a professor of kinesiology at Penn State, also participated in the research, along with several current and former graduate students working with Piazza and Rubenson.

The study’s two co-first authors were Talayah Johnson and Kavya Katugam-Dechene. Johnson completed her master’s degree at Penn State and is now pursuing a doctorate at the University of Pennsylvania. Katugam-Dechene received her doctorate from Penn State and currently serves as a research assistant professor of biomedical and rehabilitation engineering at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Other contributors included Ian Dechene, who worked as research staff on the project and is now a software engineer, and Roberto Castro, a Penn State doctoral student jointly advised by Piazza and Rubenson.

Funding was provided by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health, through awards R21AR071588 and R01AR080711. The researchers are solely responsible for the study’s content, which does not necessarily reflect the official positions of the National Institutes of Health.

Read More

Iran War Day 229: U.S. Inflation Spiked in September Due to Conflict

Admin
-
0
Iran War Day 229: U.S. Inflation Spiked in September Due to Conflict

Foreign Affairs

State of the Union: President Trump issued a cryptic warning on Iran at a campaign rally.

daily news updates US-ECONOMY-MARKETS-OIL

U.S. inflation jumped to 3.7 in September—up from 3.4 the months prior—as conflict in the Middle East pushed up energy prices, according to data published Wednesday by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. It was the first time since May that inflation rose.

President Donald Trump, speaking Tuesday at a campaign rally in Alaska, again suggested the U.S. will relaunch major hostilities against Iran. “Wait till you see what we do to Iran, we’re gonna do a number,” Trump said. “Because we’ve sort of had it.”

Subscribe Today

Get daily emails in your inbox

The Atlantic and other outlets have reported that the White House was pushing the Pentagon to develop plans for imminent strikes on Iran, but Trump denied he’ll attack before the midterm elections in early November.

Ali Ozmaei, the navy commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, challenged the U.S. over the Strait of Hormuz, where Tehran has escalated its attacks in recent weeks. “If the Americans think the Strait of Hormuz is open, let them come closer,” Ozmaei said Wednesday. “We are impatient to sink American warships.”

The war between Saudi Arabia and the Yemeni Houthis continued to escalate on Wednesday, with explosions heard in Riyadh. Overnight, the headquarters of Saudi oil company Aramco were struck by the militant group, which pledged to continue its attacks.

CFTC keeps finding new ways to define crypto, sports betting

Admin
-
0
CFTC keeps finding new ways to define crypto, sports betting
  1. Homepage
  2. >
  3. News
  4. >

  5. Business
  6. >
  7. CFTC keeps finding new ways to define crypto, sports betting

TL;DR: The CFTC is proposing crypto rules that would pull most retail spot trading under its oversight and arguing that sports event contracts are swaps, while courts and the NFL push back. Deep cuts to staff and enforcement at the agency could also prompt a federal probe.

Key Takeaways:

  • CFTC proposes “clever” new crypto rulemaking that creates “crypto asset markets” (CAMs) and defines “crypto asset transactions” (CTXs) as trades without wallet delivery within 28 days.
  • Comments on the proposal are due December 2, and final rules likely won’t arrive until late Q1 or early Q2 2027 at best.
  • CFTC says sports bets are swaps, but the NFL throws a penalty flag, telling the Supreme Court that event contracts on its games are sports betting for states to regulate.
  • CFTC probed for staff cuts, enforcement actions: headcount fell about 21%, and 2025 enforcement actions dropped 80% versus the 10-year average.

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is taking steps to burnish its role as the primary regulator of digital assets, but its efforts to erect a regulatory moat around prediction markets aren’t faring nearly as well.

Last week, the CFTC issued a request for public comment on its proposed rules governing retail commodity transactions involving ‘crypto assets.’ You have until December 2 to comment on the 108-page document, which aims to help fill the gap left by last month’s failure of the Senate’s digital asset market structure bill (the CLARITY Act).

The CFTC is proposing two major changes, one involving the establishment of a new category of platforms under the CFTC’s purview, which the regulator is calling ‘crypto asset markets’ (CAMs). The goal is to establish a national “uniform set of regulations” under which CAMs can operate without worrying about different and/or contradictory state-level licensing regimes.

CAMs would be a subcategory of the CFTC’s designated contract markets (DCMs), and would specifically apply to platforms offering retail trades involving leverage, margin, or financing. (So, basically, futures, but not futures.) CAMs would require the use of futures commission merchants (FCMs) as intermediaries in these trades.

However, the second proposed rule aims to define ‘crypto asset transactions’ (CTX) in a way that encompasses most crypto transactions, thereby allowing CAMs to effectively conduct spot-based trading, something outside the CFTC’s purview.

The CFTC would define a CTX as any retail commodity trade in which the customer doesn’t take ‘actual delivery’ of the tokens within 28 days of a trade. The CFTC’s ‘actual delivery’ definition implies the tokens must land in a customer’s private digital wallet under their direct control. So if the assets stay on a CAM, it’s a CTX.

Former CFTC general counsel Rob Schwartz suggested that, as written, meeting the CTX definition doesn’t actually require the customer to use leverage; “it just has to be offered that way.”

Schwartz summed up the CFTC’s “clever thinking” thusly: “As a result of all of this: (1) offered, even if not executed, on margin; and (2) no actual delivery because the asset is not actually delivered on chain — you *must* trade the spot crypto asset on a registered exchange. Voila, a CFTC-registered and regulated spot crypto exchange.”

(Amanda Fischer, a former chief of staff at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), noted that in 2018 the Coinbase (NASDAQ: COIN) exchange was lobbying for the exact opposite of the CFTC’s proposal, aka “that blockchain finality wasn’t required for ‘actual delivery’ to be satisfied.” The circle of life…)

The day the proposed rules were unveiled, CFTC chairman Michael Selig gave a speech at the Fordham Law Blockchain Regulatory Symposium in which he claimed that registering as a CAM “is a federal option for crypto asset exchanges.” Selig said exchanges could continue to pursue individual state-level money transmission licenses “based upon the products and services the firm intends to offer.”

Selig called CAMs “Rung 2 exchanges” while DCMs occupy Rung 3. “To obtain designation as a CAM, an exchange would be required to adhere to the statutory DCM core principles, but with the benefit of a tailored set of regulations that are purpose-built and designed for CTXs. An exchange offering futures, options, or swaps would remain subject to the current DCM framework.”

Selig noted that the CAM proposal also “contemplates a “proof-of-reserves” obligation for exchanges that maintain customer property in omnibus accounts held for their customers’ benefit.” Selig suggested that customers of the bankrupt FTX exchange “would have benefited” from such an obligation.

However, TD Cowen analyst Jaret Seiberg said Monday that Selig is playing beat-the-clock with his new rule proposals. Seiberg said “at best” the CFTC’s post-comment rules won’t be out until late-Q1 or early-Q2 2027, which would push the final rulemaking into 2028, a presidential election year. A new White House occupant could appoint their preferred candidate to run the CFTC, one who might not share Selig’s zeal for lowering crypto guardrails.

Seiberg further warned that any attempt by Selig to speedrun this process would increase the likelihood of a federal judge pausing the process while legal challenges run their course. In other words, CAMs and CTXs are still a long way off from becoming the law of the land.

Back to the top ↑

Predicting when sports bets are swaps is a mug’s game

Last Friday, October 9, CNBC reported that the Blockchain.com platform had applied to the CFTC for DCM and FCM licenses so it can join the rest of the cool kids at the crypto table who have added prediction markets and derivatives to their exchange offering.

Blockchain.com CEO Peter Smith said his platform’s users “should be able to manage their digital assets, trade derivatives, and take positions on real-world events easily, without jumping between different apps.”

Blockchain.com partnered with prediction market giants Polymarket this year to offer event contracts to non-U.S. customers. Blockchain.com also partnered with the Hyperliquid decentralized exchange to offer perpetual futures to non-U.S. customers, but Blockchain.com is now eager to cut out the middlemen and launch its own U.S.-facing products.

The CFTC has gone all in on prediction markets like Polymarket and Kalshi over the past two years. This has included filing lawsuits against nine U.S. states that insist prediction markets offering ‘event contracts’ on sporting events must acquire sports betting licenses in every state they operate.

The CFTC’s argument that sports ‘contracts’ aren’t state-regulated bets but federally-regulated ‘swaps’ has so far produced more losses than wins in state and federal courts. Some federal appeals courts have noted that, under the CFTC’s expansive definition of swap, state-licensed sportsbooks would be breaking federal law by offering bets on sports.

On October 9, the CFTC issued two documents seemingly intended to blunt that argument. The first was an interim final rule that “casino-style gambling products, including wagers placed on sportsbooks and casino games, are excluded from the ‘swap’ definition.” Selig was quoted in the release saying “casino-style gambling products are not derivatives.”

But the second release that day was a notice of proposed rulemaking that defined the term ‘swap’ to include “event contracts, including those based on sports, politics, cultural, and weather-related events … financial instruments that are commonly known to the trade as swaps.” Selig was quoted as saying, “These products are commodity derivatives squarely within the CFTC’s regulatory remit under the Commodity Exchange Act and are within the agency’s exclusive jurisdiction.”

If you’re left scratching your head as to how a sports wager placed on a sportsbook isn’t a swap but wagering on a sports-based event contract is a swap, you’re not alone. As with the CTX proposal above, the CFTC’s lawyers appear to be writing these documents with fingers crossed behind their backs, hoping no one will notice the at-times threadbare logic.

The CFTC’s argument took another serious hit last week when the National Football League urged the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the matter in its current session. But in doing so, the NFL also stated its unequivocal view that ‘event contracts’ on NFL games are sports betting and should be regulated by states, not the CFTC.

Back to the top ↑

CFTC’s lack of enforcement sparks federal probe?

Selig appeared on CNBC on October 6 to sell his CAM/CTX proposals, but, in the process, made an unfortunate verbal slip that his critics might call Freudian. Asked what the benefit of a federal licensing option under the CFTC meant for crypto platforms, Selig said: “With federally regulated crypto markets, you’re able to offer fraud… not fraud, you’re able to offer margin, leverage or financing.”

The odd slip of the lip notwithstanding, Selig’s critics appear to fear that the significant staff reductions at the CFTC under Trump 2.0 have undercut the agency’s capacity and/or willingness to conduct investigations and bring charges against crypto companies that color outside the regulatory lines.

Last week, NPR reported on the ~21% reduction in CFTC staff between June 2024 and January 2026. The CFTC has seen a modest uptick in staffing this year, but as of July, the headcount was still 16% below its decade average.

Former CFTC enforcement attorneys see a direct correlation between the staffing cull and the 80% reduction in enforcement actions the CFTC brought in 2025 compared with the average over the previous 10-year period.

Former CFTC enforcement lawyer Jeff Le Riche told NPR the staff cull “castrated the enforcement team.” Another former enforcement lawyer, Joe Konizeski, said then-acting chair Caroline Pham told enforcement staff “we’re closing all our crypto … any matter that was even marginally related to crypto ended up getting closed.”

Konizeski added that “fewer cops on the beat … creates a real incentive to start engaging in fraudulent and deceitful behavior. Enforcement is down and that means that there’s going to be more fraud.”

But NPR reported on the existence of a letter sent in July by the federal Government Accounting Office (GAO) to Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) in response to her request for the GAO to “review matters relating to actions taken at the to reduce the CFTC’s workforce.”

The letter said it “will address this work as part of our response to a related request from .” The GAO indicated it would be “about five months” before “staff with the required skills will be available to initiate an engagement.” That timeline suggests a probe could get underway in December.

Back to the top ↑

FAQs:

What is a crypto asset market (CAM)?
A CAM is a proposed CFTC platform category for retail crypto trades involving leverage, margin, or financing.

What is a crypto asset transaction (CTX)?
A CTX is any retail crypto trade where the customer doesn’t take “actual delivery” of tokens into their own wallet within 28 days.

When is the CFTC crypto proposal comment deadline?
Comments are due December 2. Analyst Jaret Seiberg expects final rules no earlier than late Q1 or early Q2 2027, which could push finalization into 2028, a presidential election year.

Does the CFTC say sports bets are swaps?
Yes. On October 9, the CFTC proposed defining “swap” to include sports event contracts while excluding casino-style sportsbook wagers. The argument has produced more court losses than wins so far.

Why did the NFL go to the Supreme Court?
The NFL urged the Court to take up the dispute and stated that event contracts on NFL games are sports betting that states, not the CFTC, should regulate.

How much has the CFTC cut staff and enforcement?
Staff fell by about 21% between June 2024 and January 2026, and 2025 enforcement actions dropped by 80% compared with the previous 10-year average, according to NPR and former CFTC enforcement attorneys.

Related articles

  • CFTC purged staff who raised crypto, prediction market concerns

  • CFTC redefining ‘swaps’ to protect prediction market sports bets

  • Gemini purges C-suite; CFTC picks prediction market fight with states

Back to the top ↑

Watch | Tokenizing Real‑World Assets: Richard Baker Explains Finance’s Next Shift

Steven Stradbrooke is a ‘self-taught’ writer who learned his craft from every book, newspaper, magazine, newsletter, snarky blog post and bathroom wall poem he ever read. Formerly the senior writer for 11 years at the CalvinAyre.com gambling industry news site, Steven wrote his first Bitcoin-focused article in 2011 and began contributing to CoinGeek in 2017. He joined CoinGeek full-time in 2021.

Tagged:

Warnock: Trump ‘Has Unleashed a Kind of Wickedness Into the Ether’

Admin
-
0
Warnock: Trump ‘Has Unleashed a Kind of Wickedness Into the Ether’

Senator Raphael Warnock (D-GA) said Tuesday on MSNBC’s “All In” that President Donald Trump “has unleashed a kind of wickedness into the ether.”

Host Chris Hayes said, “I wanted to ask you about something that happened today in the news. Not necessarily related directly to the election, but a fellow man of the cloth. You are, of course, senior pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church. That’s where you’ve preached for decades. The pope today underwent surgery to remove a lobe in his lower right lung that was found to be cancerous. I’m not going to ask you a medical question, but I am curious what you thought about the pope’s ministry and the role that he has played, not just obviously in the church, but more broadly in the sort of moral and spiritual life of the country, in the world, since he became the pope.”

Warnock said, “In this moral moment in America, where we have a president who has unleashed a kind of wickedness into the ether, who is the most gifted politician I’ve ever seen at dividing us, we have an American pope. I think that is significant. I think Pope Leo’s voice is so important in this moment. I love the ways in which he has tried to point us to the higher angels of our nature. He has challenged this war mongering president, and as a result of that, he got push back from perhaps the most prominent and well known Catholic these days in politics, the vice president. But the pope’s faith, he is a man of faith. And I’m praying for him in this moment, for his strength, for his well-being. And I’m praying for the health of our country.”

Follow Pam Key on X @pamkeyNEN

Kraken parent to buy Lithuanian Saldo Bank amid TradFi expansion

Admin
-
0
Kraken parent to buy Lithuanian Saldo Bank amid TradFi expansion

news

Cryptocurrency exchange Kraken’s parent company, Payward, will buy Lithuania-based Saldo Bank as part of its expansion into traditional financial services, calling it “a deliberate next step in an infrastructure strategy we’ve been building for years.”

Payward signed a definitive agreement to acquire Saldo Finance Oy, a Finnish holding company whose subsidiary, Saldo Bank UAB, is a digital bank licensed in Lithuania, according to a Wednesday announcement.

Payward said Saldo Bank’s EU banking license and footprint will enable it to expand into four operating markets, including Lithuania, Finland, Sweden and Germany, where the bank already offers retail term deposits. The bank’s authorization is also passported into the Netherlands.

The acquisition is expected to close in 2027, subject to customary regulatory approvals. It would enable Payward Banking to offer traditional banking services, including interest on deposits, lending products and banking-as-a-service, such as card issuance, passporting and lending capabilities to small and medium enterprises.

“A regulated EU bank is the piece that lets us serve European clients the way a primary financial institution should: one place to hold assets, move them freely, and put them to work,” said Payward co-CEO Arjun Sethi.

In August, Payward launched a multi-asset debit card in the US through Kraken’s payment app, Krak, allowing customers to spend crypto and fiat while earning up to 2% cashback in dollars or Bitcoin.

Related: Kraken parent clears Dubai’s final hurdle for dirham trading rollout

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

Can crypto users trust the supply chain behind hardware wallets?

Admin
-
0
Can crypto users trust the supply chain behind hardware wallets?

Ordinary cryptocurrency owners cannot realistically be expected to detect sophisticated tampering with hardware wallets, security researcher Joe Grand told Cointelegraph on Tuesday.

Grand specializes in hardware security and has helped recover cryptocurrency from locked wallets. His work includes developing techniques to bypass security protections and extract data from memory chips used in wallets made by Trezor and KeepKey.

“It’s really hard to explain to people how they’re supposed to look at their devices, because even technical people like me are not looking at every single device to see if it’s been tampered with,” Grand said.

The concerns surfaced Friday after crypto losses were reported involving Ledger devices sold through CryptoBilis, a reseller listed as authorized in Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines. Ledger confirmed Saturday that one affected device contained an unauthorized implant.

Malicious implants in Ledger wallets sold by CryptoBilis captured users’ recovery phrases and transmitted them over cellular networks, the French hardware wallet maker said.

More control doesn’t mean less trust

Hardware wallets are designed to keep private keys offline, reducing exposure to online attacks that can target software wallets.

Some hardware wallets have achieved global popularity, and their distribution networks have created opportunities for supply-chain tampering.

Crypto analyst Mati Greenspan told Cointelegraph that he has never used a hardware wallet despite being involved in the industry since 2013, seeing little value in adding another chain of trust.

Related: MediaMarktSaturn pulls Ledger products amid tampering reports

“When you buy a hardware wallet, you’re introducing a whole new chain of trust, from the manufacturer to the supplier to whoever handled the device before it reached you,” Greenspan said.

Nick Neuman, CEO of Bitcoin security company Casa, said avoiding third-party trust entirely is impossible. “There is always an intermediary you will need to trust,” he said, adding that users should spread their risk across multiple providers rather than rely on just one.

Security checks cannot catch everything

Trezor, among Ledger’s main rivals, said its devices undergo authenticity checks and accept only signed firmware, but acknowledged that these protections cannot rule out physical tampering.

“You can also check that the packaging and holographic seal are intact and look for unusual marks on the device, but these checks alone cannot guarantee that it has not been modified,” a Trezor spokesperson told Cointelegraph.

Related: Ledger asks resellers to halt sales in Southeast Asia and Hong Kong

The company said the implants found in Ledger devices pose a different challenge because they capture information from the screen without modifying the firmware. Trezor said that it has not observed this type of attack on its own devices.

On Tuesday, Trezor announced that it would reduce the number of resellers as a “preventive” step.

Hardware wallet designs can reduce tampering risks

Grand suggested several physical design changes, from transparent casings that expose internal components to tamper-resistant enclosures that would force attackers to recreate the housing to conceal modifications.

“It’s going to be a lot harder for an adversary to inject additional hardware into the device, because they would have to recreate the entire housing,” he said.

The security researcher also pointed to anti-tamper design recommendations from electronics engineer Dave Jones, while cautioning that such measures should not be relied on alone. They could make supply-chain attacks more difficult, but would not eliminate the risk.

Magazine: Ledger attack spreads to EU, AI finds ’18 trillion XRP’ bug: Hodler’s Digest

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

PI holds below $0.0800 as stablecoin plans emerge, but downside risks persist

Admin
-
0
PI holds below $0.0800 as stablecoin plans emerge, but downside risks persist

Key takeaways

  • Pi Network traded below $0.080 Wednesday after a 2% rebound the previous day.
  • The Pi Core Team is exploring stablecoin integration intended to complement PI’s existing utility.
  • PI remains below its 50-day and 200-day EMAs, with weak momentum keeping the near-term outlook bearish.

Pi Network (PI) has dropped below $0.0800 on Wednesday after a modest rebound helped it avoid extending losses below last week’s low.

The token traded around $0.07956, losing the previous session’s 2% gain. Meanwhile, the Pi Core Team reiterated its exploration of stablecoin integration as a way to broaden activity across the ecosystem.

Despite the recovery, PI remains below key moving averages, leaving the price vulnerable if support at $0.0774 fails.

Pi Core team explores stablecoin integration

The Pi Core Team is considering how stablecoins could support additional ecosystem uses while preserving PI’s role as the network’s native cryptocurrency.

Stablecoins can play an important role in expanding certain utility across the Pi ecosystem, particularly in use cases where predictable price stability is important.

The introduction of stablecoins requires a deliberate, unique approach, and must be aligned with Pi Network’s ecosystem and principles.
– Simply adding a stablecoin does not guarantee that it will naturally complement Pi.
– How the two function alongside each other depends on how stablecoins are integrated into the Pi ecosystem.

This makes the design and initial introduction especially important. Stablecoin functionality should be directed toward circumstances where price stability is needed while preserving the utility of the Pi cryptocurrency across the broader ecosystem.

Learn more https://t.co/MuubtRW4uh

— Pi Network (@PiCoreTeam) October 13, 2026

Its partnership with Open Standard, the issuer of OUSD, focuses on potential stablecoin integration and rewards programs for Pi users, known as Pioneers.

According to the announcement, Open Standard is backed by companies including Visa and Stripe. Planned OUSD rewards initiatives aim to encourage broader ecosystem participation.

The integration remains an area of exploration, with the team emphasizing that stablecoin functionality should complement PI’s utility.

PI rebounds but remains below key moving averages

PI’s rebound has provided some relief after recent selling pressure, but the broader technical picture remains weak.

The token trades below the 50-day exponential moving average at $0.0882 and the 200-day EMA at $0.1256. Both remain overhead barriers to a sustained recovery.

In the near term, PI is trading between support at $0.0774 and resistance around $0.0827. The latter corresponds to the 23.6% Fibonacci retracement identified in the analysis.

Until buyers overcome that upper boundary, the latest gain remains a rebound within a bearish structure.

The Relative Strength Index is near 37, below its neutral midpoint and consistent with continued selling pressure.

The Moving Average Convergence Divergence indicator remains slightly negative and below its signal line, reinforcing the cautious outlook.

These readings suggest the rebound has yet to produce a convincing shift in momentum. Holding above $0.0800 offers short-term stability, but buyers still need to clear nearby resistance.

table tennis PI/USD Daily Chart

On the downside, a sustained break below $0.0774 could expose the $0.0704 swing low.

On the upside, PI first needs to reclaim $0.0827 before challenging the 50-day EMA at $0.0882. Moving above both levels would strengthen the case for a more durable recovery.

A sustained advance beyond $0.0882 could then bring the 50% Fibonacci retracement near $0.0990 into focus.

For now, the ability to defend $0.0774 and overcome $0.0827 will help determine whether the rebound develops into a recovery or gives way to renewed losses.

Share this article
Categories
Tags

BMW’s Manual Transmission On Its M Cars Is In Trouble Due To Mild-Hybrid Technology

Admin
-
0
BMW’s Manual Transmission On Its M Cars Is In Trouble Due To Mild-Hybrid Technology

BMW M’s manual transmissions face an uncertain future as 48-volt mild-hybrid systems and declining supplier support make continued production increasingly difficult.

Frank van Meel (BMW M’s boss) warns that 48-volt mild-hybrid systems are technically incompatible with manual transmissions, casting doubt on the future of stick-shift M models as the brand integrates hybrid tech.

48-volt mild-hybrid systems integrate tightly with transmission software to optimize performance and fuel efficiency. This precise synchronization is difficult to achieve with manual gearboxes due to unpredictable human shifting.

Within BMW’s M lineup, manual transmissions are becoming increasingly restricted. The S58 six-cylinder engine generates torque levels that exceed the capacity of current manual gearboxes in their most powerful configurations, which accounts for the absence of manual transmissions in the M3 and M4 Competition models. Similarly, both the M2 xDrive and the M2 CS are restricted to BMW’s eight-speed automatic transmission.

This shift raises significant concerns among enthusiasts regarding the upcoming G84 M3, anticipated for a 2028 release. As the vehicle is expected to incorporate a 48-volt mild-hybrid system, the feasibility of retaining a manual transmission is in jeopardy. While BMW has yet to issue a formal confirmation, achieving the necessary technical integration between hybrid systems and manual gearboxes appears increasingly unlikely.

Despite strong demand from M enthusiasts, the future of BMW’s manual transmissions is in jeopardy due to the integration of 48-volt mild-hybrid systems, high engineering costs, and diminishing supplier support. Fans should consider securing a manual M3 or M4 now while they remain available.

  • Also See: The Next-Generation BMW 1 Series To Be An Electric Hatchback

Volkswagen Says A New ID.Buzz Is Coming And It Will Be Better And Cheaper

Admin
-
0
Volkswagen Says A New ID.Buzz Is Coming And It Will Be Better And Cheaper

Volkswagen is committed to the ID. Buzz, confirming future updates and an all-new, more affordable successor built on the SSP platform to improve market appeal and technology.

A next-generation ID. Buzz built on its Scalable Systems Platform (SSP) to improve affordability and technology. By transitioning from the MEB platform and potentially utilizing LFP batteries, VW aims to reduce production costs and address the current model’s slow sales and pricing challenges. While specific details remain undisclosed, the successor will prioritize range, faster charging, and improved software to broaden market appeal.

Future ID. Buzz models should adopt the more ergonomic, user-friendly cabins found in newer VW vehicles. By replacing touch-sensitive sliders with physical controls and intuitive layouts—like individual window switches—Volkswagen can improve functionality without sacrificing the van’s iconic character. These practical, driver-focused refinements should be prioritized to ensure the next-generation ID. Buzz is as easy to operate as it is stylish.

Volkswagen faces the challenge of evolving the iconic ID. Buzz design without relying solely on nostalgia. While maintaining the van’s unique personality is key, design chief Andreas Mindt cautions against repeating retro looks, using the modern Beetle as a warning. As a result, VW aims to refine the ID. Buzz. Buzz’s identity for future generations to ensure it remains fresh rather than derivative.

The next-gen ID. Buzz, based on the SSP platform, is expected after 2030, following a flagship VW SUV. Until then, Volkswagen will refine the current model with software updates and more accessible configurations. While the van’s high price remains a challenge, its strong design and sales—which doubled to 60,700 units last year—keep it a key part of the brand. In the U.S., the model is slated to return for the 2028 model year, while European versions are already seeing ergonomic upgrades like physical steering wheel controls.

  • Read Also: Volkswagen Is Phasing Out The TDI Engine; Only The Tiguan And Passat Will Keep It

Hadjar told to adapt to Verstappen’s Red Bull

Admin
-
0
Hadjar told to adapt to Verstappen’s Red Bull

Dutch motorsport figure Tom Coronel says Red Bull’s recent breakthrough may be exposing a familiar pattern around Max Verstappen – when the car becomes faster, the second driver can suddenly look further away.

Toto Wolff made a similar observation in Singapore, noting that as Red Bull has found a stronger operating window for Verstappen, Isack Hadjar has appeared less comfortable.

Coronel believes that is because the latest Red Bull again suits Verstappen’s preference for a very sharp car.

“That change at the rear of the car,” he told Viaplay. “And on the circuit where things never really went well, that was Singapore.”

“Kerbstones, bumps, slow corners. That was actually always the problem. This weekend was magnificent.”

“They have solved the problem that took them four years.”

Hadjar has said he wants to adjust the car more towards his own preferences, but Coronel thinks that could be the wrong direction.

“Then you become a bit slower again,” he predicted.

“A car that is very pointy seems to be too fast. And that is also what Max likes best.”

“You shouldn’t be afraid of that rear end.”

Coronel pointed to Sergio Perez as an example of what can happen when a teammate tries to move the Red Bull away from Verstappen’s preferred balance.

“If he sets up the car the way he wants, we’re just going to see gaps of between three tenths and half a second again,” he said.

For Hadjar, Coronel thinks adaptation is the better answer.

“I think Hadjar is the type of person who should be able to adapt,” he continued. “Just stay in Max’s slipstream.”

“Watch where he gains an advantage and try to appropriate that feeling. Don’t change the car to suit your own preferences.”

“Because quite simply, that doesn’t work. Ultimately, the stopwatch is king.”

The Supreme Court may be about to make America’s prisons much crueler

Admin
-
0
The Supreme Court may be about to make America’s prisons much crueler

On the first day of his second term, President Donald Trump issued an executive order requiring the Bureau of Prisons to “ensure that no Federal funds are expended for any medical procedure, treatment, or drug for the purpose of conforming an inmate’s appearance to that of the opposite sex.” Issued alongside a record 26 other orders that day, it was an unsurprising development, because Trump had made this issue one of the centerpieces of his 2024 campaign.

The fate of that executive order, as well as the US Bureau of Prisons’ (“BOP”) memoranda implementing the order, is now before the Supreme Court in a case called Trump v. Kingdom. And, while this case obviously has high stakes for incarcerated transgender people specifically, the Court’s resolution of this case could potentially have far greater reach — cutting off many cis and transgender people’s access to healthcare while they are incarcerated.

That’s because one of the central questions in Kingdom — though this issue is not yet before the justices — is when the Constitution requires prisons to provide medical care to incarcerated people. In Estelle v. Gamble (1976), the Supreme Court held that the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishments” imposes on the government an “obligation to provide medical care for those whom it is punishing by incarceration.” People in prison, after all, cannot simply drive themselves to the hospital if they get sick. If the prison does not give them adequate medical care, they will suffer untreated and potentially die.

For procedural reasons, the Court is unlikely to opine on whether Estelle requires prisons to provide gender-affirming care to trans people right away. But the question of when the Eighth Amendment requires prisons to provide medical care to incarcerated people is front and center in the Kingdom case, which means the Court could potentially use Kingdom to limit all imprisoned people’s access to healthcare — or even to undercut the Constitution’s protections against cruel and unusual punishments more broadly.

Ironically, this case also arises out of a famous political blunder by pro-trans advocates. In 2019, when then-Sen. Kamala Harris was seeking her party’s 2020 presidential nomination, the ACLU circulated a questionnaire to candidates that asked if they would use presidential authority “to ensure that transgender and nonbinary people who rely on the state for medical care — including those in prison and immigration detention — will have access to comprehensive treatment associated with gender transition, including all necessary surgical care?”

Harris responded that she would, and also said that she “pushed the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to provide gender transition surgery to state inmates” while she was state attorney general.

Years later, during his 2024 debate with Harris, Trump claimed that the then-vice president “wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison.” And not long after, his opposition to gender-affirming care for trans people in prison became a key part of his campaign.

It’s unclear why the ACLU thought it was a good idea to shine a light on this issue in 2019 because, at the time, the BOP provided gender-affirming care to people in federal prison. The ACLU — which represents the pro-trans side in the Kingdom case — now argues that transgender people in federal prison have had access to at least some forms of gender-affirming care “since at least 1992.”

Indeed, Trump’s own administration concluded in a 2018 memo that the Bureau of Prisons’ “statutory mandate to provide basic medical and mental health care” to incarcerated people obligated it to provide “pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., cross-gender hormone therapy), hair removal and surgery (if individualized assessment indicates surgical intervention is applicable)” to transgender people in prison if their doctors determined that these interventions are “medically necessary care.”

In any event, regardless of why Trump fixated on cutting off trans healthcare for people in federal prison, Kingdom is now before the Court. That means that the fate of trans people in prison — and, if the Eighth Amendment issue eventually reaches the Court, all incarcerated people — is now in the hands of a Republican Court that is often hostile to trans litigants, and that has, at times, signaled that it wants to drastically roll back the scope of the Eighth Amendment.

What are the legal issues in the Kingdom case?

At least since Estelle, the Court has held that people who are incarcerated are not also sentenced to live and die without medical care. As the Court said in Brown v. Plata (2011), “a prison that deprives prisoners of basic sustenance, including adequate medical care, is incompatible with the concept of human dignity and has no place in civilized society.”

Under Estelle and Brown, transgender people often have a right to gender-affirming care during their incarceration. As the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in Edmo v. Corizon (2019), such a person must show that they have a “serious medical need” for such care — typically by demonstrating that the care was prescribed to them by their health provider. But the Constitution does not permit prisons to deny medically necessary care to incarcerated people.

In Kingdom, the ACLU raised this Eighth Amendment argument in the lower courts, but those lower courts ruled in favor of transgender people in prison on different, much more technical legal grounds.

For over three decades, from at least 1992 to 2025, according to the ACLU’s brief to the justices, the BOP provided at least some gender-affirming care, including hormone therapy, to transgender people. This matters because, when a federal agency changes its policies, a federal law typically requires it to “examine the relevant data and articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action, including a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.” This explanation often must explain the agency’s justification for “disregarding facts and circumstances” that justified the previous policy.

Both the ACLU and the lower courts that heard Kingdom argue that the Trump administration did not comply with this obligation when it cut off care for trans people in prison.

Among other things, the district court that heard this case determined that the administration cited “zero evidence from its own medical or mental health care professionals to support its conclusions” against providing transgender healthcare. While the Trump administration argues that providing gender-affirming care makes prisons less safe, the district court also noted that “the government has not cited a single instance of gender-affirming care giving rise to safety concerns despite having provided such care for many years.”

Is this a persuasive legal argument against the Trump administration’s new policy? I think it is. And so did three federal judges that previously heard the Kingdom case. But the fate of trans people in prison is now in the hands of a Supreme Court that rarely rules in favor of transgender litigants, and that has a history of handing down legally incoherent opinions that are inconsistent with the Court’s own precedents, and that also deny legal rights to trans people.

The current Court’s uncertain commitment to the Eighth Amendment

Because the lower courts that heard Kingdom did not rule on the Eighth Amendment question, Kingdom should not currently give the justices an opportunity to roll back Estelle. But, in the likely event that this Court rejects the ACLU’s argument that the Trump administration did not adequately explain its new policy, the case will return to the lower courts and the Eighth Amendment issue will be fully litigated — teeing up the Eighth Amendment question for the justices to decide in the near future.

This issue could arise, moreover, at the exact moment that some justices are pushing for sweeping changes to how their Court understands the term “cruel and unusual punishments.” Indeed, at least some of the Supreme Court’s recent Eighth Amendment precedents suggest that the Republican justices want a wholesale rewrite of the Court’s previous precedents laying out what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

Since the mid-to-late twentieth century, the Court has held that, in Chief Justice Earl Warren’s words, the Eighth Amendment “must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.” Thus, as certain forms of punishment grow more uncommon, they become more constitutionally dubious.

This “evolving standards of decency” framework is front and center in nearly every major Supreme Court decision interpreting the Eighth Amendment for the last five or six decades, including Estelle.

In Bucklew v. Precythe (2019), however, the Court’s Republican majority seemed to abandon this framework. Although decades worth of pre-Bucklew decisions established that a punishment is unconstitutional if it is considered cruel and unusual today, Bucklew suggested that a method of punishment is unconstitutional only if it “had fallen out of use” at “the time of the founding.”

Bucklew did list some methods of punishment that fail this test, but they are things like “disemboweling” or “burning alive.”

Thus, if taken seriously, Bucklew’s new approach to Eighth Amendment cases would dramatically expand the government’s power to impose harsh punishments. The late Justice Antonin Scalia, for example, argued that a Bucklew-like approach to the Eighth Amendment does not prohibit the government from executing most intellectually disabled offenders, and that it does not limit the government’s ability to impose excessive punishments for minor crimes.

In fairness, some of the Court’s post-Bucklew decisions are inconsistent with the framework the Court laid out in that case. So at least some of the justices who joined Bucklew may have since decided that it’s a bad idea to toss out the Court’s entire framework for Eighth Amendment cases. But Bucklew was one hell of a warning shot over the bow of the Eighth Amendment. And the mere fact that the Bucklew decision exists means that advocates for humane punishments must hold their breath any time this Court is asked whether a particular punishment is cruel and unusual.

In the worst-case scenario for people in prison, a case like Kingdom could inspire the Republican justices to overrule — or, at least, drastically limit — decisions like Estelle and Brown. That would mean that all incarcerated people, regardless of their gender identity, could lose access to medically necessary care unless the government decides to give it to them as an act of grace.

Government banking on unions’ reluctance to start negotiations easing after today’s strike

Admin
-
0
Government banking on unions’ reluctance to start negotiations easing after today’s strike

Seventeen years after the last public sector shutdown, Wednesday’s strike got under way at Dublin waste facilities, the city’s port and other locations overnight.

Tens of thousands of workers are stopping at their workplace gates and joining the action this morning at schools, hospitals, courts, council buildings and hundreds of other public buildings. Huge disruption is expected, including in the private sector, with many parents having to stay at home to mind children, thousands of hospital appointments cancelled and court cases adjourned, as well as driving test centres and many other Government services closed for the day.

The background to this strike is very different from the one in November 2009, when the government was reeling after the financial crash and workers were protesting severe cuts, some already made and others that were being flagged for the budget to come.

This time, the public finances are in good shape, even if they are unhealthily reliant on corporation taxes, and unions say their members have some catching up to do, due to spikes in inflation and substantial increases to the cost of daily basics like housing, food and fuel.

READ MORE

Acrimony has also been building behind the scenes, however, and the unions contend that Government is still doing business as if the country is in a financial crisis, with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, only established at that time, regularly curtailing its ability to negotiate locally with line departments and agencies, or vetoing deals they think are over the line.

[[What services will be affected by the public sector strike and what will be closed?Opens in new window ]

There is also the issue of local bargaining, a component of the last pay deal, which was due to be worth 1 per cent of pay then and a further 2 per cent in the current deal.

The unions felt they should have wide-ranging latitude to address outstanding issues in their own areas but even where their departments agreed, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform often intervened to stop the payments being processed. More than a year after the money was supposed to be due, thousands of staff have yet to receive it. For others, it has been processed on the eve of the current industrial action.

[[Unions urge Taoiseach to intervene in bid to avert public sector strikeOpens in new window ]

That seems to explain some of the union side’s reluctance to attend the Workplace Relations Commission in recent days, while there is a frustration among the unions’ leadership with the failure of Jack Chambers to address their position directly before the last deal expired, or in the almost four months since.

There is lingering anger too over the Government’s decision to proceed with a VAT cut to hospitality that the unions argued was completely unjustified, and its reaction to the fuel protests.

The ballots held by unions suggested very high levels of support for action, although there is an element of members wanting to give their negotiators the strongest possible hand. With some of the unions not paying any strike pay, and others paying only very modest amounts or waiting for the dispute to progress before paying out, the strikers will feel the impact of their own action in their pockets.

Public opinion, seemingly supportive at the moment, may also shift if next Wednesday’s second strike and further actions go ahead.

[[Live updates: ‘Living pay cheque to pay cheque’ – public sector workers on strike across the countryOpens in new window ]

And the apparent move by Chambers on the issue of when pay can be discussed will make it harder for those driving strategy to continue refusing invitations to get around a table and discuss their grievances.

That they will have to compromise on their current demands as part of that process seems inevitable, but the Government did not help itself by setting aside €1.2 billion for pay increases next year, a figure that is hard to reconcile with what appears to be required to address the situation.

Obviously, the Government, already the target of criticism for its increased spending, could reveal how much it is really prepared to devote to addressing the dispute. Chambers suggested on Tuesday night that this too should be the subject of normal negotiations.

Getting those started remains the first challenge, but the Government is banking on it becoming easier once the unions have made their point today about the anger of their members.

The Politics of Solar Energy Are Getting Weird, Mean, and a Little MAGA

Admin
-
0
The Politics of Solar Energy Are Getting Weird, Mean, and a Little MAGA

A mysteriously named political action committee has started running ads reminding voters in Colorado about that time GOP representative Lauren Boebert of Colorado and her date were caught on camera in 2023 getting handsy during a performance of the musical Beetlejuice.

That same PAC is producing a spot hitting Anthony Constantino, a Trumpist congressional candidate in upstate New York, because someone used his sticker-printing company to briefly make stickers that read, “Kill the Police.”

Attack ads are everywhere in the last month ahead of November’s election. But these spots are a little different. The semi-anonymous PAC that’s funding and making the ads, the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition, is a pro-solar-energy outfit. It’s funded in part by crypto billionaire Chris Larsen and run by a team of New York City political operatives.

“Playing hardball politics, that’s what our opponents do, right, in oil and gas? And I just think the solar industry has been—I don’t know how to describe it—a little too nice,” says Larsen, the cofounder of the blockchain finance firm Ripple and a major backer of the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition.

Green groups don’t usually act like this, with knives out, ready to stab opponents between the ribs. They tend to make appeals based on scientific consensus, or fears of what will happen to a warming planet without collective action. They’re also traditionally Democratic, but a few high-profile members of the MAGA movement are now speaking up for solar too. Texas, the home of the fossil fuel business, has quickly become a solar powerhouse. There are some signs that the Trump administration’s across-the-board opposition to solar may be starting to crack, at least a little, after years of slashing greentech subsidies and throwing up one roadblock after another to clean power projects.

Some of Larsen’s natural allies in the renewables field aren’t too happy about the PAC’s efforts, arguing that they’re alienating the decisionmakers they need most. But the politics of energy, especially solar energy, are changing.

Larsen’s PAC is devoting $15 million to go after seven of the more prominent opponents of renewable energy in this year’s congressional elections. That’s on top of roughly $5 million they’ve already spent in the primaries, cutting ads against Republican representatives Ralph Norman of South Carolina (whom the PAC called a “MAGA traitor”), Andy Ogles of Tennessee (“He doesn’t even bother going to work”), and Chip Roy (“chosen the side of powerful pedophiles”) of Texas. A PAC that received funding from Invest in Tomorrow has also gone after one Democrat, Rhode Island governor Dan McKee. All four lost their primary races.

In Roy’s case, the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition spent almost $1.5 million to stop his run for Texas attorney general. Most of the money went to ads on right-wing platforms like Truth Social and Rumble. The word “solar” was never mentioned.

“Don’t talk about renewables. Don’t talk about climate,” says Chris Coffey, the chief executive of the consultancy Tusk Strategies, which is running the PAC. “Pick the best issue that we can pick. And in a Republican primary, we should savage this guy for not being MAGA enough.”

Roy received a 100 percent rating from Heritage Action, the political arm of the Trumpist think tank. Coffey said he got some pushback from a few Democratic operatives, who were concerned that replacements for Roy and other PAC targets might not be any less extreme—on climate or any other issue. Without their far-right track record, the argument went, those replacements might even be stronger candidates in the general election.

“Who fucking cares? Who cares? Like, it can’t be worse,” Coffey, a veteran of New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg’s City Hall, says in response. “At least we’ll have extracted some payback.”

The PAC is currently putting $2 million into ads blasting GOP representative Victoria Spartz of Indiana as allegedly corrupt; it’s aiming to target Texas Republican Brandon Herrera for his “abolish old people” jokes and his plan to get rid of Social Security. Then there is the $1.5 million ad campaign about Boebert and the Beetlejuice incident. “If Lauren Boebert can’t be trusted in a room full of kids, then she can’t be trusted in the halls of Congress,” the commercial’s narrator says.

Other special-interest organizations have been running this playbook for decades. Groups supporting labor and opposing gun regulations regularly try to make examples of politicians who oppose their agenda. Green groups haven’t been as aggressive historically. That’s a problem, says Steph Bosh, the board chair of the Community Clean Energy Coalition. While her group has raised nearly $2 million to promote their favored hyperlocal candidates this cycle—and the League of Conservation Voters’ affiliated super PAC is spending another $50 million—Bosh says she appreciates that someone else is taking a less friendly approach.

“As a broad renewable energy industry, we need to be loved, respected, and feared,” Bosh adds. “We need to have a carrot, and we need to have a stick.”

James Carville, the Democratic pundit and former campaign manager, doubts the stick is big enough. “Twenty million—what the fuck do you think the carbon industry spends in a year?” he recently said to the Washington Monthly.

Roy, for his part, insisted that the PAC’s spending had played “zero role” in his race (while his campaign staff put out statements denouncing the “radical California Marxists trying to buy Texas elections”). Ralph Norman, his fellow solar target, warned about the “elite” taking out “the $1 million attack ad against me,” while Ogles complained, “they literally are trying to make an example out of me.”

“They were the difference maker,” Chris Burger, a Republican political consultant in Tennessee, says of the pro-solar group. “I don’t think Charlie wins if the PAC doesn’t come in with $2 million.”

The Trump White House and its allies in Congress have been beyond hostile to renewables, which they believe to be intermittent sources of energy, and dominated by China. The administration has done everything it can to promote the production of oil, gas, and coal, while kneecapping renewable alternatives, from tying green projects in bureaucratic knots to pulling billions of dollars’ worth of solar subsidies and paying companies billions more to stop offshore wind farm construction. Then the Trump team tried to get other countries to adopt similar attitudes. “If you don’t get away from the green energy scam, your country is going to fail,” the president told the United Nations General Assembly last year.

But the Trumpists have been slightly less hostile to solar than to offshore wind farms, which, according to the president, cause cancer, “kill all your birds,” and drive whales “crazy.”

“While wind is dead, solar is merely in the ICU,” Richard Goldberg, a former member of the administration’s National Energy Dominance Council, tells WIRED.

That has provided a small but real opening to promote solar to the America First set, especially with energy prices spiking at home, the war in Iran pushing up oil prices around the world, and the spread of AI data centers creating a borderline-insatiable need for more power.

In February, the American Clean Power Association launched a campaign to do just that, releasing a poll from former Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway’s consulting company showing that 75 percent of MAGA voters in key states supported the idea of adding more solar energy to the national mix. According to an internal memo reviewed by Politico, soon to follow were “paid media partnerships with podcasts like the Katie Miller Pod” (hosted by the former DOGE spokesperson, who is married to White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller) as well as “advertorials and sponsorships with right-of-center publications.”

Katie Miller, once a consultant for Elon Musk, a renewable energy advocate, has repeatedly pushed for solar on social media since then. “Over 70 percent of the new utility-scale capacity went into states won by President Trump,” reads one of her posts. “Electricity generation is a national security issue—not a partisan one.” (Miller, who did not respond to requests to comment for this story, has previously denied receiving any funding from the clean power group.)

There’s also the data center issue. China hasn’t had problems powering its data centers, thanks in part to its widespread deployment of renewables—315 gigawatts of solar added to the grid last year, about six times more than the United States added from all sources combined. The US is in an entirely different situation. MAGA-minded promoters of solar are trying to leverage that gap to make a Trumpy argument for renewable energy. Concerns about the climate are out; fears about losing the AI race to China are in.

T1 Energy, which bills itself as one of the few truly all-American solar manufacturing companies, has hired Checkmate Government Relations, a lobbying firm led by Donald Trump Jr.’s old hunting buddy, and Tower Strategy, helmed by a former CIA operations officer, Rick De La Torre, to press its case in the administration. These lobbyists have tried to make the case that the administration’s beef isn’t with solar in general; it’s with Chinese solar. They’ve done it in the kind of pec-flexing language that’s become MAGA’s stock-in-trade.

“American-made, utility-scale solar is one of the few technologies that can be deployed at the speed and scale required” for data centers, De La Torre posted on LinkedIn. “China knows this. That is why it continues to flood markets, compress margins, and keep U.S. manufacturers on the defensive. Undercut. Outscale. Outlast.”

“Washington has a choice. Treat solar manufacturing as a strategic industry, the way we now treat semiconductors and critical minerals,” he added. Or only claim “to compete with Beijing.”

There are some indications that the argument may be gaining traction. In August, the Trump administration added a new 15 percent tariff and price floors on foreign-made solar components. T1’s CEO hailed it as a victory for domestic supply chains and manufacturing. More recently, negotiations in Congress are continuing on a bipartisan permitting reform bill that would, among many other things, make it easier for solar providers to plug into the electric grid.

Which led some solar executives to question whether it’s smart for the group to beat up on Republicans, right as a few of them seem to be creeping in solar’s direction.

“We’ve been hard at work speaking to Republicans about why supporting solar and batteries helps with energy abundance and affordability. And we’ve been successful. If this becomes about going after Republicans and turns solar back into a partisan issue, that would be an epic blunder,” says Russell Gold, T1’s executive vice president for strategic communications.

Tom Matzzie, the chief executive of solar company CleanChoice Energy, is serving as executive chair of the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition PAC. Cofounders include Peter Davidson, CEO of the investment firm Aligned Climate Capital, and Michael Brune, former executive director of the Sierra Club. But it’s Larsen who supplied the lion’s share of the early money for the PAC—$6 million of the initial $7 million or so it had raised through August 31, according to federal election commission records.

He’s had an uneven record of political giving, of late. Earlier this year, Larsen spent $3.5 million to support congressional candidate Alex Bores, who was targeted by the AI industry and lost his race. Larsen’s company, Ripple Labs, has donated nearly $100 million to Fairshake, the pro-crypto PAC, which racked up electoral successes in 2024 but just lost a major fight when its preferred bill to regulate cryptocurrencies died in the Senate.

The willingness to go on the attack isn’t the only way that Larsen’s PAC differs from others in the green movement. Not that long ago, renewable advocates talked about an “energy transition” away from old, dirty fossil fuels and toward newer, cleaner ones. Larsen is suggesting instead to red-district politicians that they embrace the idea of fossil and renewable energy sources existing side-by-side, even as the PAC he funds throws haymakers at solar’s enemies.

“You could be pro oil and gas and pro solar,” he says.

Trump commercial railing against his enemies kept airing after court blocked it

Admin
-
0
Trump commercial railing against his enemies kept airing after court blocked it

Rochon found that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in their claim that the Trump administration violated the 2026 Consolidated Appropriations Act requirement that no funding may be used “for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by Congress.”

“Defendants do not contest that the at-issue advertisements are purely partisan and unconnected to DHS’s official functions,” Rochon wrote. “Thus, the Court finds that Moving Plaintiffs are likely to succeed in showing that the advertisements are impermissible ‘publicity or propaganda’ under Section 718 .”

Trump recycled ad from 2024 campaign

One of the ads “is almost identical to one used during President Trump’s 2024 campaign, other than the fact that its funding disclaimer now identifies the United States government rather than his presidential campaign,” Rochon wrote. “It depicts President Trump walking down a hallway while delivering a series of statements about his political adversaries. Among other things, he promises to ‘demolish the deep state,’ ‘drive out the globalists,’ ‘cast out the communists, Marxists and fascists,’ ‘throw off the sick political class that hates our country,’ and ‘rout the fake news media.’ This advertisement provides no information about DHS’s official functions.”

As of October 8, the ad “had aired approximately 9,679 times, generating an estimated 972 million impressions at an estimated cost exceeding $9.09 million,” Rochon wrote. Another $6.3 million was estimated to have been spent on four other government-funded ads challenged in the lawsuit. That’s about $15.4 million as of October 8, and more was spent over the next few days.

Rochon found “a clear and substantial likelihood” that the Trump administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act “because Congress did not appropriate funds for DHS to spend on disseminating the challenged advertisements.” Rochon said a restraining order was necessary despite the DHS claim that it had “no plans” to continue running the ads.

“Defendants also have not provided reasonable assurances that OMB will not reapportion funds from another source to continue running similar advertisements,” she wrote.

The temporary restraining order is in place for only two weeks, but it can be converted into a preliminary injunction that would keep the ads off the air while litigation continues. Trump, the White House, OMB, and DHS face a similar lawsuit filed by the Democratic National Committee in the federal court in the District of Columbia. A hearing on a motion for a temporary restraining order in that case is scheduled for Thursday.

More expensive gas, semiconductors likely pushed up inflation last month

Admin
-
0
More expensive gas, semiconductors likely pushed up inflation last month

WASHINGTON — Inflation likely worsened in September in one of the last price reports the government will issue before the midterm elections that have been heavily defined by concerns over affordability.

Consumer prices are forecast to have risen 3.6% in September compared with a year earlier, up from 3.4% in August, according to a survey of economists by data provider FactSet. The Labor Department will issue the report Wednesday morning.

On a monthly basis, prices are expected to have risen 0.6% from August to September, FactSet said, up from 0.4% the previous month and the biggest jump since April.

The figures will likely underscore the lingering impact of the Iran war on gas prices and the stubborn persistence of inflation, which has fallen sharply from a 9.1% peak in 2022 but has ticked higher since the war began in late February. Elevated inflation has posed political problems for Republicans in Congress and is a challenge for the Federal Reserve, which is required by Congress to seek stable prices.

Ongoing inflation has taken a toll on Trump’s standing with U.S. voters. A poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that just 17% of U.S. adults approve of his handling of the cost of living issue. And only 26% approve of his handling of the economy overall, a new low.

Excluding the volatile food and energy categories, core prices likely rose 2.5% in September from a year ago, up slightly from 2.4% in August. That is closer to the Fed’s 2% inflation target, but it has been stuck at mostly that level since January of this year — just before the Iran war. Core prices are forecast to have risen just 0.2% from August to September.

Federal Reserve officials are watching inflation data closely to determine whether they need to raise their short-term interest rate further, and by how much.

Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh said last month that inflation isn’t moving quickly enough back to the central bank’s target, causing the Fed to hike rates for the first time in three years, to about 3.9%.

“The plain fact is that inflation is too high and has been for too long,” Warsh said at a news conference last month. Inflation reports over the summer “do not tell me that underlying trends have meaningfully improved,” he added.

Yet some key Fed officials have suggested the central bank can wait before increasing rates again. The Fed has a policy meeting Oct. 27-28 but most Wall Street investors expect it to hold rates then, and potentially implement another hike in December. Fed officials have penciled in just one more rate hike this year.

By raising borrowing costs, the Fed hopes to slow spending and growth and cool price increases. Yet much of the current inflation comes from supply shocks, such as the Iran war’s disruption to oil and gas supplies, and higher interest rates can’t address those bottlenecks.

Warsh has said his goal is to keep the gas price spike from seeping into more areas of the economy. It’s already pushed up the price of air fares about 23% from a year ago. Gas prices jumped about 9% from August to September, a big increase that will drive much of the overall jump in inflation. Rising gas costs are a highly visible sign of inflation and often drive down measures of consumer sentiment about the economy.

Prices at the pump have ticked lower in recent weeks, though they remain higher than a month ago. Gas prices averaged $4.34 a gallon nationwide Tuesday, up a few cents from a month earlier.

Those costs raise shipping and other expenses for many large and small businesses, some of which are forced to pass the cost to consumers. Last week, PepsiCo said that it will raise prices for its snack foods, including Doritos, Ruffles, Sun Chips, and some sodas to offset higher costs for fuel, aluminum, and food ingredients.

The artificial intelligence buildout has also sharply elevated the cost of semiconductors, computer equipment, and electrical components, which have been passed into costs for consumer electronics such as gaming devices, laptops, and smartphones.

On September 1, Nintendo increased the price for its Switch 2 gaming system by 11% to $499.99. And Apple’s newest iPhone, the iPhone 17, cost about 10% more than its previous upgrade, though some of that likely reflects greater capabilities.

15 Questions to Discover Your Life Purpose, and the Step Most Lists Skip

Admin
-
0
15 Questions to Discover Your Life Purpose, and the Step Most Lists Skip

Why a List of Purpose Questions Usually Changes Nothing

You have done this before. You found a list of purpose questions, made tea, opened a notebook, and answered every one of them honestly. An hour later you had a page of thoughtful sentences and nothing you could act on. By Thursday you could not remember what you wrote, and your week looked exactly like the week before it.

The questions were not too hard. They were the wrong kind. Most of them asked you either to explain your own motives or to predict how an imagined future would feel, and people are unreliable at both.

The 15 questions to discover your life purpose below are built the other way around. Each one points at something that already happened and left a trace: a Saturday, a receipt, a text message, a name on a calendar. An answer like that can be counted, dated and checked. That is the difference between a nice page of writing and a decision you can make this month.

A Purpose Question Is Only Useful If Its Answer Can Be Checked

Here is the rule that changes what you write down: a purpose question earns its place only if someone else could verify your answer. Dates, names, amounts, calendar entries, bank statements. “I value creativity” fails the test. “I spent eleven Saturdays last year rebuilding the shed, and I taught my nephew to use a router” passes it, and it carries far more information.

Your own record is the one body of evidence about you that you never had to invent. You already voted, hundreds of times, with hours and money and attention, and the votes are still sitting there in your calendar and your card statement. A sense of purpose is not a secret buried behind your personality. It is a pattern in that record, and a pattern needs repeats before you can trust it. One good Saturday is an anecdote. The same kind of Saturday eleven times is a direction.

So the 15 questions to discover your life purpose split into three sets, each aimed at a different kind of trace: the hours you spent, the costs you absorbed, and the people who were better off. That three-set grouping is our own construction, not a validated instrument. The reason for it is practical. A single angle gives you a hobby list, while three angles crossing on the same subject give you something sturdy enough to bet two weeks on.

cycling Keyline drawing of three notebook columns labeled hours, costs and people, with one circled answer in each column and arrows converging on a box that reads one sentence, one two-week test: only answers that repeat across the three kinds of evidence feed the decision.

The 15 Questions, in Three Sets

Four rules before you start. Three sentences maximum per answer, because the fourth sentence is where the justifying begins. Use concrete nouns, dates and names. Do not write adjectives about yourself. And if you cannot name a specific instance, write “no instance” and move on, because a blank is data too, and five blanks in one set tells you where your life has quietly stopped happening.

Give it forty minutes. Paper beats a screen here, mostly because it is harder to edit yourself on paper.

Set 1: The hours you already spent

  1. In the last two years, what did you spend a whole Saturday on that nobody asked you to do?
  2. What have you taught another person more than once, without being paid for it?
  3. Look at last month’s calendar. Which three commitments did you volunteer for when you could have passed?
  4. During your worst month in the last two years, when everything optional got cut, what did you keep doing anyway?
  5. When did you last lose track of time, and what was physically in front of you when it happened?

Set 2: The costs you absorbed

  1. What have you spent your own money on in the last year that had no career or status payoff?
  2. What have you turned down that most people in your position say yes to?
  3. Which subject do you keep reading about with no obligation to, and what is the last thing you read on it?
  4. What stayed on your calendar even in the weeks that fell apart?
  5. What are you still angry about that is not about you?

Set 3: The people who were better off

  1. Who thanked you for something specific in the last year, and what was it?
  2. Who comes to you, and what do they come to you for?
  3. Which group of people do you defend when they are not in the room?
  4. If your job disappeared tomorrow, who outside your household would notice, and why?
  5. Ten years from now, who do you want to be able to say you helped, and what is the first thing you would have to do this month for that to be true?

Question 15 is the only forward-looking one, and it is deliberately cut down to the first action. The other fourteen answers are your evidence. This one is the guess that evidence lets you make.

Why These Questions Work Better Than “What Is Your Why?”

You are not bad at reflection. Reflection is just a weaker instrument than it feels like from the inside. In a review of research on how people come to know their own personalities, published in Frontiers in Psychology, Kathryn Bollich, Paul Johannet and Simine Vazire report that people sometimes hold mistaken views about their own motives, and that the evidence for self-reflection as a dependable route to self-knowledge is mixed. In some of the studies they review, analyzing your feelings makes accuracy worse rather than better. That is a qualified finding about knowing your own personality, not proof that every thought you have about yourself is wrong. It is still enough to explain why an honest evening with a notebook can leave you no better informed.

There is a practical version of this. Writing in Harvard Business Review in 2018, organizational psychologist Tasha Eurich described a research program of 10 investigations with nearly 5,000 participants, alongside an analysis of nearly 800 earlier scientific studies, and reported a pattern in the interviews: the people who came across as more self-aware asked themselves “what” far more often than “why.” Eurich presents that as practitioner research rather than a controlled experiment, so treat it as a promising prompt and not a proven law. It does match what the lists get wrong. “Why am I here” has no checkable answer. “What did I do last Saturday” does.

The other half of a typical list asks you to imagine something: what you would do if money were no object, how you would spend a final year, what your eulogy should say. Daniel Gilbert and Timothy Wilson’s review in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B gathers the evidence that imagining future events produces systematic errors in predicting how they will feel, including a tendency to overestimate how intense and how lasting the reaction will be. Those errors vary by situation, and none of this makes imagination useless. It does mean your imagined future is the least reliable material in the notebook, and most purpose lists are built almost entirely out of it.

That is also why “follow your passion” lands so badly at 45. It asks you to produce a feeling on demand. Reading your own record asks you to notice what you were already doing when nobody was watching and nothing was riding on it.

How to Turn 15 Answers Into One Sentence and One Test

Answers do nothing on their own. The next forty minutes matter more than the first forty, and most lists skip this part entirely.

Circle only what repeats. Read all fifteen answers and mark anything that appears at least twice: the same verb, the same kind of person, the same problem, the same room. Ignore the single best answer, however much you like it. You are looking for repeats, not highlights. Two or three of them is plenty to work with.

Name the subject, not the activity. “Woodworking” is an activity. “Making physical things that outlast me, with somebody younger learning beside me” is a subject. Activities come and go, and if you build your next two years on one of them you will have to start over when your shoulder gives out. Subjects survive a change of method.

Write one sentence in this form. “I am the person who ______ for ______, mostly about ______.” Fill it from your circled repeats and nowhere else. If your sentence needs a word that appears in none of the fifteen answers, you are decorating, and a decorated sentence will not survive a normal week.

Pick one two-week test, with a date and a stop rule. One action, under two hours a week, scheduled on specific days, with a defined end. Not a career change. Not an announcement. Something small enough that failing costs you nothing, and real enough that doing it tells you what a notebook cannot. Write down in advance what would count as a dead end, because without a stop rule you will either quit on day four and call it proof, or keep going out of stubbornness.

Here is how that plays out, as a hypothetical composite rather than a real person. Take an operations manager in her late forties, good job, two teenagers, flat for about three years. Her answers come back with mentoring in three of them: a Saturday spent helping a former colleague rewrite a resume, an unpaid hour a week with a new hire for most of last year, and two thank-you notes that both mention patience. None of it is in her job description. Her sentence: “I am the person who gets anxious people ready for things, mostly at work.” Her two-week test is not a coaching certificate. It is two 45-minute sessions with a junior analyst on Tuesday mornings, with the stop rule that if she dreads both, mentoring is not the thread and she goes back to the circled answers. Three weeks later she either knows something real or she does not, and either way it cost her ninety minutes.

If your sentence pulls toward a bigger change, do not act on it this month. Run the small test first, then read how a career change at midlife actually gets sequenced before anything irreversible happens.

What If Nothing Repeats, or It All Looks Too Small?

If nothing repeats, that is not a failed exercise. It is usually one of two findings. Either your last two years were pure maintenance, which is common when you are carrying work, teenagers and aging parents at once, or your spare hours have gone to recovery rather than to anything that would show up as a pattern. Both are real answers, and both point somewhere. The next move is not to find your purpose. It is to get one or two unclaimed hours back into the week. A life audit is a more useful next step than another question list, and if the flatness is heavier than that, feeling lost in your 40s treats it as the common condition it is rather than a personal failing.

The other objection is that a two-week test is too small for a question this size. It is small on purpose. The test is not there to answer the decade-sized question. It is there to produce the one thing your notebook cannot give you: a record of what you actually did when the hour was scheduled, which then becomes evidence for the next round of questions. A sentence you wrote on Sunday tells you what you believe about yourself. Two kept appointments tell you something closer to true.

What this article does not cover is the slower work after the test: what to do when the thread is real and the rest of your life has to be re-sequenced around it over months rather than weeks. We wrote that separately, including the research on why meaning drains out of a life that looks fine in every department, in how to find purpose in midlife. If you are past work and the structure went with the paycheck, finding purpose in retirement takes the same problem from that end, and a life plan is where a confirmed thread turns into a calendar.

Start With Question 4 Tonight

Do not block out an evening for all fifteen. Answer question 4 now, the one about what you kept doing during your worst month, because it takes ninety seconds and it is the most revealing item on the list. What survives a bad month is what you actually protect.

Then put forty minutes on the calendar this week for the rest of the 15 questions to discover your life purpose, with a pen. If you want a frame for the bigger rebuild afterward, reinventing yourself at 50 is the next thing to read. And this is probably not a midlife crisis, even when it feels like one late at night. You are collecting evidence on yourself, and you have more of it than you think.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the purpose of life?

Nobody can answer that for you, and any list that claims to is selling something. The answerable version is smaller and more useful: given what you have already done with your hours, money and attention, what are you for right now, and what is one thing you can test in the next two weeks? That question has a checkable answer. The cosmic one does not, which is why sitting with it tends to produce an evening of writing and no change.

What are 5 questions to ask?

If you only have ten minutes, use these five. What did you spend an unasked-for Saturday on? What have you taught someone more than once for free? What did you keep doing during your worst month? What have you spent your own money on with no career payoff? Who thanked you for something specific, and for what? Four of the five point at your record rather than your imagination, and that is the whole trick.

What are the 7 key questions?

Different lists circulate under that name, and most are variations on “what is your why.” Ours would be the five above plus two: what are you still angry about that is not about you, and who would notice outside your household if your job disappeared. Seven is not a magic number. What matters is how many of your answers contain a date or a name.

What are 10 questions to ask yourself?

Take sets 1 and 2 of the 15 questions, numbers 1 through 10. Hours and costs are enough to spot a repeat. Set 3 tells you who the repeat is for, which is usually what turns a pattern into something you want to act on, so skipping it saves twenty minutes and costs you the point.

How do you determine what your purpose is?

By looking for repeats in evidence you already produced, then testing the smallest version of what you find. Answer the fifteen questions with dates and names, circle anything that appears at least twice, write one sentence in the form “I am the person who ___ for ___, mostly about ___,” and run a single two-hour-a-week commitment for two weeks with a stop rule. What you keep doing when the hour is scheduled tells you more than what sounded right in a notebook.

Everybody Loves Britt Stewart. So What Happened?

Admin
-
0
Everybody Loves Britt Stewart. So What Happened?

Britt Stewart and Taylor Hanson were the ones to watch when it was announced that the pair would compete together on the 35th season of Dancing With the Stars.

Hanson didn’t have the dance experience of fellow contestants Harry Shum Jr. or Jenna Dewan, but there was a sense of possibility around the partnership. Fans who came of age in the ’90s would get to watch their childhood crush learn a proper quickstep with one of the show’s most beloved pros. Plus, musicians tend to arrive with a built-in sense of musicality and timing, as well as the ability to perform under pressure.

The hope was that Hanson and Stewart would improve week by week, maybe make the semifinals, and if everything went according to plan, deliver the kind of epic finale freestyle that has become one of the show’s greatest rewards. Plus, everyone knows: Britt deserved her win already.

Instead, after a spirited foxtrot to a Doobie Brothers classic during week three’s Yacht Rock theme—their highest-scoring dance of the season—Hanson and Stewart were eliminated. They looked genuinely stunned. “I’m so sorry,” Stewart mouthed to the 42-year-old musician as the other stars, pros, and judges looked on. It was an unusually heavy moment for a show that has historically managed to make even its most dramatic eliminations feel like part of the fun. But Dancing With the Stars isn’t the show it used to be.

The internet, obviously, had thoughts. Reddit quickly assembled to demand Stewart be given a ringer if she deigns to return next season, with fans drafting elaborate lists of potential partners who might finally get her to the finale. “Justice for Britt!” became a rallying cry. Opinion pieces appeared. Even judge Carrie Ann Inaba, not exactly known for handing out consolation prizes, admitted that this one “hurt.”

The reaction might seem disproportionate if you still think of Dancing With the Stars as a bit of analog entertainment in which a famous-for-something person pairs with a professional ballroom dancer and eventually gets eliminated. But the show’s recent resurgence has tipped the scales.

The pros—the backbone of the show, who for years seemed encouraged to step back so their celebrity partners could shine—have moved to the fore. As DWTS found a highly engaged generation of fans online, its pros amassed social media followings of their own, becoming influencers, Broadway draws, targets, and in some cases, just as starry as the stars they’re they’re paired with.

swimming Image may contain Face Happy Head Person Smile Adult Black Hair Hair Photography Portrait Accessories and Jewelry

swimming Image may contain Head Person Face Adult Photography and Portrait

Stewart is one of the clearest examples of that shift. Growing up in Colorado, she started dancing at age three, studying ballet, tap, jazz, contemporary, and hip-hop. She landed an Off Broadway gig at 13, then appeared in all three High School Musical movies at 15. Her career has since included dancing alongside Katy Perry and Janet Jackson, choreography, teaching, and work on the DWTS live tour. Her path to ballroom was helped along by two familiar names: choreographer Mandy Moore and Derek Hough. Stewart joined DWTS in 2016 as a troupe member before becoming the show’s first and only Black female pro in 2020. She’s reached the semifinals twice but has never made the finale.

In other words, the woman the internet is demanding be given a better celebrity partner has been working at the highest levels of dance since she was a teenager. But yes, she still hasn’t gotten to hoist the Len Goodman Mirrorball Trophy, which now feels less like a piece of pointless pop culture kitsch and more like a physical representation of serious work, dedication, and the increasingly consequential art of winning over the internet.

I wanted to know what Britt Stewart makes of the campaign to get her to that finale, what it means to be a pro on a show that has become a cultural phenomenon, and whether she believes in the concept of a ringer, and more.

Take me back to week three, when you and Taylor were eliminated. You were coming off what the judges called your best dance. What was going through your head?
Transparently, my very first thought was that I had failed.

Is that why you said sorry?
Yeah, I felt like I’d let Taylor down. My last four seasons of Dancing With the Stars have ended very early, with nothing progressing past week four. So at that moment, I thought, Oh, this is a me thing at this point, because four seasons in a row, I’ve seen this trend.

You seemed to be hitting a turning point with Taylor. What was happening in rehearsal that week?
He’s a perfectionist, so we’d been working on getting him to understand that he had zero dance experience and that the competition isn’t about being perfect. It’s about the journey and the process. I really wanted him to enjoy dancing. And we’d finally gotten there—and then we got eliminated.

I know Dancing With the Stars is a competition, a reality show. But me and the other pros love what we do. You’re developing this amazing relationship with your partner, learning and moving your body. It’s incredibly vulnerable. So when you find out that journey is going to be cut short, it is disappointing and you do get sad. I thought we would’ve had more than three weeks.

And yet the elimination seems to have made people love you and Taylor even more. What’s it been like to watch a disappointing moment turn into this outpouring of affection?
Because Dancing With the Stars has become such a cultural phenomenon, everybody has an opinion, so the love we’ve both received has been unexpected. I’m hesitant to use the word overwhelming, but it really has been. I could never have imagined that something that was such a raw experience for me could turn into something so positive.

swimming Image may contain Clothing Dress Footwear Shoe Adult Person Standing Formal Wear Face Head and Photography

Before you became a pro, you’d already built an impressive career. How did Dancing With the Stars come into the picture?
I was doing a Disney 60th-anniversary special, and Derek was there. His partner wasn’t available, so Mandy Moore asked if I could do the final partnering section with him. I had no ballroom experience, but she helped create that opportunity for me. I auditioned for the troupe, eventually got in, and spent five seasons there before becoming a pro. I was literally learning ballroom while I was on the show—I’d never done it before. I faked it pretty good.

The show has exploded in recent seasons, thanks in part to social media. Stars are clamoring to compete, while TikTokers and Redditors obsess over the lore of the pros, dissecting partnerships and building worlds around people they technically don’t know. Does that intimacy ever feel overwhelming?
Social media has been a blessing. It’s part of the reason the show is at such a high level of success and keeps building momentum. We’re able to showcase ourselves and our partnerships outside of what you see every Tuesday and really build community. To see the love and support for the pros has been amazing. We are the show’s constant, so to see fans show us that support is something none of us take for granted. But you have to have boundaries or the negative can start to outweigh the light.

Dance has always had its pop culture ebbs and flows. Dirty Dancing sparked a dance craze; then came the Lambada and, in the late ’90s, swing dancing. Could DWTS inspire another generation to dance?
I was talking about this the other day: Dance does tend to have ebbs and flows in pop culture, even earlier. Think of the eras of Fred Astaire, Gene Kelly, and Cyd Charisse. Dance was prevalent; it was everywhere. Then in the ’70s, with John Travolta and all that.

We hadn’t really had dance be super mainstream since the ’90s, like you said, and then High School Musical happened, followed by Teen Beach, the Step Up series, and Glee. Music and dance came back into pop culture. And we’re now in a time when dance is kind of fading—except for Dancing With the Stars.

The show is practically educating a nation about dance, from the terminology to the technique. Just this season I learned about what makes a proper Cucaracha and the appropriate speed of a Viennese waltz. If it gets people, especially kids, interested in dancing again, that’s a meaningful cultural impact.
Oh my gosh, I’m so proud. Look at you, saying Cucarachas and Viennese waltz. But you’re right. The show highlights dance in such a beautiful way. It’s the artistry, the craft, the athleticism, but it’s also really special that you get to see us dancers as humans. You really get to see who we are and the lives that we live. That’s been really special to be a part of.

The concept of a ringer has become a whole thing among fans, with people on Reddit campaigning for you to get one. But we’ve seen contestants with dance experience get eliminated early, while others with no experience improve week by week. Is the ringer concept a myth?
It’s a very interesting question. Some people might say a ringer is someone with dance experience or who can dance, but we’ve had people like Heather Morris, who literally danced with Beyoncé and is incredible, get eliminated very early. Brandon first partner, Tinashe, also had a dance background and got eliminated early.

So for me, a ringer means a lot of different things. It’s someone who can move—it is hard for people to come in with nothing. But we’re in a bit of a new era of Dancing With the Stars. I think there was a bit more patience for people with zero dance experience than there is now, or at least maybe this season. So someone who can move, someone who can connect with our audience—that means kind of everyone.

The audience now spans a massive swath of demographics, and now viewers have opinions about the pros too. Does that make it harder to predict who’ll succeed?
We’re a multigenerational show—which is incredible—but it can be less predictable. You just don’t know who the audience will connect with.

There’s also a bizarrely intimate ecosystem around the partnerships. You literally met your husband—the show’s third-ever Deaf contestant—when you got paired. Why do so many DWTS relationships cross over into real life?
Dance is very connected. The obvious thing is that you go from being strangers to being in each other’s faces, and especially with partner dance, you’re very close to each other. Also, Dancing With the Stars is very intense in a short amount of time. You go from being strangers to spending every single day with one person. Sometimes that works really well and sometimes it doesn’t.

And then I think there’s another part of it. There are so many people who don’t really move their bodies. I’m such a fan of dance because I think it opens up so much. As soon as you get connected with your body, you start to connect with yourself. That can be an incredibly transformational experience for someone who has never experienced it.

So whether it’s a little bit of trauma bonding or a spiritual experience, I think that’s why you see so many couples come out of Dancing With the Stars. That’s also not uncommon in the ballroom world. A lot of partners end up getting married.

swimming Daniel Durant and britt stewart

Stewart with husband—and season 31 dance partner—Daniel Durant

Getty

swimming Taylor Hanson and britt stewart

Stewart and Hanson during week 1 of season 35 Dancing With the Stars

Eric McCandless/Getty Images

What was it like meeting Daniel, dancing with him, and eventually falling in love?
With Daniel, I just got lucky. I knew we had chemistry during the season, but I didn’t think it was romantic, and neither did he. It wasn’t really until after we got eliminated that I thought, Oh man, I really miss this guy. We started dating after that and kept it quiet for a while. We both wanted to make sure it was something real. Dancing With the Stars is so intense, and emotions get tossed up into it. But it ended up being very real. Now we’re married.

Did he have dance experience before the show? He was very good.
None. He’d done movement before. He was in the Deaf West version of Spring Awakening, so there was choreography and movement, but it wasn’t full dance training. And he took a couple of lessons before coming to the show. I was always blown away by Daniel because I didn’t understand how he was doing what he was doing and grasping what I was teaching him.

I even think now, Geez, if I had only known sign language and known about Deaf culture, the Deaf community and American Sign Language then, the things that I could have done…. But maybe it wouldn’t have been as magical.

You’re the show’s first and only Black female pro. Has that sense of responsibility changed as DWTS has become a bigger cultural force?
I’m very aware of my purpose on the show. Being the first and only Black female pro is a huge deal to me. I’m president of the nonprofit Share the Movement, which is all about creating opportunity and supporting diverse dancers in this industry. The founding board members and I actually started working on that before I became a pro.

Last week there was this little Black girl who ran up to me. I’d never met her before. We were out by the trailers, and she just ran up to me and said, “Good job.” I was like, “Who are you? What’s your name? Give me a high five.” Then I saw her mom, and she said, “Just keep doing what you’re doing. You even just being here.” She told me that every time I went onto the ballroom floor, her daughter would gasp and just love seeing me there. So regardless of everything, that matters.

Do you think you’ll ever stop feeling the weight of being the person that little girl sees when she watches the show?
It’s visibility. It’s vital. I do not take it lightly. That’s also why I say I know my purpose, but I also hold firm in my goals. Because that same little girl—I hope that she’s in the ballroom when she sees me get to the finale. That is something that matters to me hugely. And really, I want to get to the finale for that little girl more than I do myself, quite honestly.

And eventually, are we getting you that Mirrorball?
One day. Yes, I hope so.

Turkish police raid opposition TV station, halting live broadcasts

Admin
-
0
Turkish police raid opposition TV station, halting live broadcasts

Turkish police have raided the headquarters of one of the country’s most-watched news channels, halting its live broadcasts.

Reports in Turkish media said financial crimes police were searching the building of Halk TV, a pro-opposition channel, and that 11 people had been taken into custody in a raid linked to the channel’s owner. The government also appointed a new administrator to run the channel.

It is the latest in a series of crackdowns on news sources deemed to be critical of Turkish President Tayyip Erdoğan and his government.

Halk journalists were initially unable to get into the building, although they later were allowed in, several reporters said on X.

There was a heavy police presence in the building, they said.

Halk’s news channel and live broadcasts on its YouTube page were both offline early on Wednesday.

The channel has been seen by many in the country as being close to the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP). It often voices criticism of Erdoğan’s ruling AK party.

Prosecutors said arrest warrants had been issued for 17 people as part of the investigation into Halk chairman Cafer Mahiroğlu on allegations of bribery, rigging tenders and money laundering, Turkish media reported.

Mahiroğlu, who was reportedly not in the country during the raid, wrote on social media that seven members of his family were among those detained.

“Today is a dark day for Turkey,” he said in a video message. “The public’s right to information is being seized for political reasons.”

The Istanbul Bar Association denounced the move, which it noted came hours before Ekrem Imamoğlu, widely seen as Erdoğan’s biggest political rival, was due to begin his defence against corruption charges in court, for which he has been in prison for over a year.

Özgür Özel, leader of the opposition New Party, called the raid “weak and cowardly”.

“Storming a TV channel with a police raid at dawn and appointing a trustee is something only dictators do,” he wrote on social media.

Özel set up the party after being removed as the CHP’s leader by a court in May and replaced by a party veteran who had previously been voted out, in a move which further cemented Erdoğan’s grip on power.

Turkey ranked 163rd out of 180 countries in the Reporters Without Borders (RSF) 2026 World Press Freedom Index, external.

The organisation stated that 90% of national media outlets were under government control and criticised the “abusive prosecution” of critical publications in the country, which Erdoğan has led since 2003.

The vast majority of Turkish media is seen as pro-government after years of state legal and financial pressure, corporate acquisitions and self-censorship.

In September, a court ordered the blocking of access to the website and social media accounts of T24, on the grounds that it had published “LGBT propaganda”.

In October 2025, the authorities seized control of Tele1, another pro-opposition TV channel, appointing a trustee to oversee broadcasts, which were stripped of all hard-news content.

The channel still exists but its pro-opposition stance has been completely neutralised.

1...435436437...685Page 436 of 685