Feed aggregator

Eric Schmidt and other AI leaders (Karpathy, Musk, Anthropic executives) have described recursive self-improvement (RSI)—AI autonomously designing, testing, and deploying better versions of itself—as the pivotal transition from narrow, human-guided progress to potentially explosive, closed-loop intelligence growth. RSI is not yet fully autonomous across the entire AI stack with no human oversight but narrow versions ...

Read more

NASA will advance lunar science by affordably building out of the Moon Base and underpin future Moon and Mars exploration. An accelerated CLPS cadence, targeting up to 30 robotic landings starting in 2027. NASA is expediting delivery of science and technology to the lunar surface. There will be many opportunities for payload delivery including rovers, ...

Read more

Do you love something historically-unusual about today’s culture? Like maybe democracy, rock music, gender equality, cosmology, or open inquiry? Enough to work to help it last long into the future? If so, read on; if not, this essay isn’t for you.

The Bible tells of how, freed from slavery in Egypt (~1270BC), the Israelites reached the promised land in a bit over a year, but then turned away out of fear, and wandered 40 more years before entering. Humanity is now doing something similar. A few centuries ago, we saw great promise but also threats in industry, so we put only one foot there, leaving the other in our ancient system of tradition and cultural evolution.

Alas this won’t work. We could stay standing either with both feet in culture, or with both in industry, but with our feet split civilization will soon fall. Most likely to be replaced by insular religious groups the Amish or Haredim, who will then discard most historically-unusual features of today’s world mono-culture. So to save such features, we must try to move our other foot into industry. Or bust. Let me explain.

The biggest change humanity has seen in at least 10Kyrs was the “industrial revolution” in the last few centuries. Its core cause was our finding better ways to organize and optimize effort. These included (a) math in accounting, engineering, and science, (b) new ways to structure hierarchical and professional organizations, and (c) capitalist societies. The peak in industrial optimization has been big competing for-profit orgs seeking to max key numbers that drive customer choices, in areas where professionals found powerful formal abstractions. Numbers like the cost of cloth, the strength of steel, or the speed of cars.

We have allowed many modern choices to be set by such powerfully-optimizing industrial orgs. Which is why we are rich and powerful. But even in the rich most industrialized West we retain two other spheres of life which are each just as large as this industrial sphere.

One non-industry sphere is where we LARP industrial styles of specialization, procedure, and formality, but don’t actually release much of the power of industrial optimization. For example, in academia and medicine we let prestigious professionals judge quality, which results in great inefficiently and rising spending. And in much of law and government we mistakenly trust prestige, specialization, and process to work without capitalist incentives, and even to well-regulate the capitalists. We have numbers to use to let industry optimize such areas, but don’t let them.

The other non-industry sphere of life is where we pointedly resist industry-style optimization. A century or two ago we saw huge productivity gains in shipyards, plantations, and factories. But saw also how they cut individuality, variety, and enchantment, and fostered inequality, regimentation, and instrumentality. So we have worked to limit the scope of what we’ve called “totalitarian” “dehumanizing” industry.

Socialist and communist regimes tried to cut out only the capitalism part, and most other regimes have limited industry via redistribution and regulation. The arts, humanities, and culture adopted strong norms against overly-overt industry-style practices, even as modernism LARPed industry levels of change as “innovation”. And “little boxes” ridicule, and laws, have pushed ordinary folks into spending their increased wealth on variety, instead of cost-effective industrial dorm-like lifestyles.

Alas, we have been accumulating a cultural deft, and our behaviors in these non-industry spheres become more maladaptive. Before industry, the main way humans kept their behaviors adaptive was via cultural evolution, which required high cultural variety and selection pressures, and low rates of environmental change and internal cultural drift. But modern industry (a) increased rates of social environment change, (b) increased travel, talk, and trade, which has cut cultural variety, and (c) caused far higher levels of wealth, health, and security, which has cut selection pressures. In addition, the modernism cultural turn induced far higher rates of cultural drift.

So we face a stark choice. We can let our civ fall, to be replaced by the Amish, Haredim, etc. For a while the world loses industry, and when that maybe later returns it is without most of what we cherish about our current world culture. And then it likely falls as well later. Like the Israelites staying away from the promised land.

Or we can try to enter that promised land, by applying industry more to the life areas which we have so far blocked, accepting that will also change and sometimes destroy things we now like about our lives in those areas. Such as by freeing capitalism more to run academia, education, medicine, law, governance, and fertility.

Or you might change your mind about my first questions above, and decide that you don’t actually much care about the distant future. I don’t have good news here; you can either use this info to better choose carefully, or stick your head in the sand.

Oh, and if you think AI will save us, ask yourself: why would an AI culture modeled after human culture better avoid the problem of a broken cultural evolution process?

I asked a set of polls, and 3 LLMs (ChatGPT,Claude,Gemini) to rate the relative explanatory power of the following 16 causes of cultural change for the two periods 1700-1900 and 1900-2025. I asked polls re picking 1 of 4 causes, and asked LLMs to think of 50 culture changes in each period, score each cause on a 0-10 scale re each change, and then add up scores per cause. (I also asked Grok, but its rounded sums suggested that it lied about generating detailed scores.)

• Elite Youth Culture - Rise of high school and college, youth culture and movements; changes had to appeal to elite youths.

• Lazy/Myopic/Selfish/Pleas - Revert to be more lazy, myopic, selfish, pleasure-oriented.

• Forager Reversion - Revert to forager styles: more art, leisure, democracy, and equality, and less religion, fertility, and domination.

• Individualism, Authentic - Rise in status of individualism, authenticity: think for yourself, follow your heart, be true to yourself.

• Innovate, Explore, Create - Rise in status of innovation, exploration, creativity.

• Abstract Concept, Reason - Rise in status of more abstract concepts and reasoning.

• Rich, Safe, Trade/Talk - Stuff that appeals more to people who are richer and safer, with more/wider talk/travel/trade.

• Merging Culture Appeal - Stuff accessible to and can appeal to the wide range of cultures merging in this period.

• Fashion/Elite Displace - Rise in fashion as change process; changes must appeal to elites seeking to displace other elites.

• Media/Word Legibile - Legibility of change symbols to spread via words and mass media.

• Big Org/Inst. Codify - New stuff can be seen and codified by our new large orgs and institutions.

• Sounds Good, Short-Run - Prefer stuff that sounds good and shows visible short-run gains.

• Visible Sacrifice - Visible sacrifices show allegiance; we figure we value what we’ve seen recent big visible sacrifices for.

• Lose Religion/Fragment - Loss of religion and traditions as core cultural glues induce fragmentation, divergence.

• Low War/Internal Polarize - Less war and outside threats make more wealth inequality, stronger internal conflict, polarization.

• Adapt Tech/Demography - Sensible adaptation to other behavior changes, not of culture type, eg, tech, demographic, and business practices.

Here are priority out of 100 poll scores, and median of the 3 LLM sum scores:

Scores don’t vary that much, correlations between sources are weak, and I overall disagree a lot with them. From which I conclude that either this is quite hard to figure out, and/or there really were quite a few strong causes.

It’s important to remember that we humans are simply animals. A very advanced species, but members of the animal kingdom nonetheless. We all need water, food, and shelter to survive, but we also share another similarity. 

Humans also find animal mating calls and signals appealing, whether it’s the bright colors of butterfly wings, a flower’s sweet smell, or a songbird’s melodies. The findings are detailed in a study published today in the journal Science and indicate that the preference for some animal sounds might be more common than previously believed. 

In 1981, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) staff scientist A. Stanley Rand and research associate Michael J. Ryan discovered that a female túngara frog’s (Engystomops pustulosus) preference for a mate depends on the complexity of the male’s call. For this new study, Ryan and his colleagues wanted to know if human preferences for certain animal calls—including those alluring calls from male túngara frogs—correlate with the preferences of female animals.

“After witnessing those female preferences Stan and Mike [Ryan] discovered when I got to measure them myself, I became fascinated with the question of where these preferences come from,” Logan James, a STRI research associate and the study’s lead author, said in a statement. “Plus, since that team released their initial findings, we’ve found that other animals, including eavesdroppers such as blood-sucking flies and frog-eating bats, also prefer complex calls. This got us wondering how common acoustic preferences may be.” 

For the study, the team used a computer game to test humans’ preferences for different animal sounds using an online computer game. They presented pairs of animal sounds from 16 different animal species, including crickets, zebra finches (Taeniopygia castanotis), and several frog species to over 4,000 human participants from around the world. 

“In gamified citizen science, people volunteer for experiments simply because they’re fun and interesting,” added Samuel Mehr, a study co-author and cognitive scientist at Yale University’s Child Study Center. “The method is perfect for answering questions from evolutionary biology where we aim to study phenomena across many species as opposed to just a few. Our game enabled us to test lots of humans’ preferences for lots of different sounds.” 

Three male zebra finches (Taeniopygia castanotis). Image: Raina Fan.

The sounds came from animals that are known to display a preference for one sound over the other. After listening to these sound parings, the humans were asked to express their preference for one sound or the other, the way that the animals making and listening to the sounds do. 

The team found a broad overlap between human and animal sound preferences. The stronger an animals’ preference for a specific sound, the more likely it was for a human to pick that sound as their favorite. The human participants were also quicker to select the more attractive sound. Humans and animals share a strong preference for lower pitch sounds and those with acoustic adornments, such as “trills,” “clicks” and “chucks” in bird songs and frog calls.  

“Darwin noted that animals seem to have a ‘taste for the beautiful’ that sometimes parallels our own preferences,” Ryan concluded. “We show that Darwin’s observation seems to be true in a general sense, probably due to the many sensory system properties we share with other animals.” 

The post Even humans love a good mating call appeared first on Popular Science.

Chess is widely seen as a great equalizer. Players from every social, racial, and economic class have squared off across the board for nearly 1,500 years, with victories determined solely by skill and strategy. Unfortunately, the egalitarian foundations of chess are rarely reflected beyond the game itself. During the Middle Ages, for example, many contemporary accounts from both Christian and Muslim societies depicted their opposing side as barbaric, blasphemous, and inferior.

However, recent reexaminations of medieval artwork are complicating these assumptions. After reviewing a range of artwork from Europe and the Middle East, Cambridge University historian Krisztina Ilko believes that chess players on either side of the board were well aware of the game’s capacity to humanize and humble. As she explained in a study recently awarded the Medieval Academy of America’s Article Prize in Critical Race Studies, chess has bridged cultural divides and subverted stereotypes at least as far back as the 13th century.

Abu’l Qasim Firdausi, ‘Buzurgmihr masters the game of chess’. Folio from the First Small Shahnama (Book of Kings) (Iraq or Iran, c.1300–30). Credit: The Metropolitan Museum of Art

“Medieval sources repeatedly state that chess is war without bloodshed, and that it represents a just world,” Ilko explained in a statement. “Chess was a powerful vehicle for people hailing from widely different places, even civilizations, to interact with each other. It was an intellectual exchange.”

Some of the most prominent examples are found in the Libro de axedrez, or Book of Games—a manuscript commissioned by King Alfonso X of Spain in 1283 CE. In the manuscript, dozens of illustrations in it showcase non-white players from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East holding their own against their European opponents. One scene features a Muslim and a Jewish player playing chess, while another reveals four Mongols peacefully enjoying a match. These are far cries from how such groups are described in other Eurocentric artifacts. 

“When people with non-white skin color are depicted in medieval images, scholars have tended to see them in either exalted or subdued positions. So you get the Queen of Sheba at one extreme, and executioners and other malignant forces at the other,” said Ilko. “Chess reveals a different, more complex story.”

Medieval rulers like King Alfonso were almost certainly keenly aware of the real problems these reductive stereotypes caused. Europe had famously fallen behind in science advancements by the Middle Ages, and the Spanish ruler’s court purposefully sought out and translated Islamic math, astronomy, and medical knowledge. These interactions inevitably led to chess games—and presumably, a lot of losses for Spanish diplomats. Of the 103 chess problems shown in Libro de axedrez, 88 are based on Muslim play styles.

St Nicolas miracle chess scene in the late 14th-century altarpiece from San Nicolas, Portopi, now in the Museu de Mallorca. Credit: Krisztina Ilko

Another example is visible in a late 14th century Spanish altarpiece dedicated to Saint Nicholas of Myra. The scene takes place in a Muslim court between a dark-skinned king and a light-skinned thief. Ilko argues that the players’ respective physical features challenged the prevailing European system that emphasized whiteness. She believes that these depictions along with many other examples show the importance of chess throughout generations—not only as a fun strategy game, but as a way to break down societal barriers.

“Chess was and remains a game of logic, where intellectual prowess matters. Chess operated on a different plane where people could engage with each other as equals, irrespective of their skin color,” said Ilko. “What mattered was ‘who’s smarter?’ [and] ‘who can win?’, not ‘who’s more powerful or socially superior?’”

The post Medieval chess was more inclusive than the world around it appeared first on Popular Science.

Spring has almost arrived in the northern hemisphere and with the new season comes warm temperatures, blooming flowers, and adorable baby animals. Right under our noses, coyotes (Canis latrans) may be building dens and having litters of pups. However, you probably won’t see them. These flexible wild canines will do everything they can to keep us out of their dens, according to new research published in the journal Ecology and Evolution.

Where the dens are located

Researchers followed 48 urban coyotes fitted with GPS tracking collars and located 20 dens throughout Atlanta, Georgia. More than half of the dens were located in natural structures such as burrows and fallen tree trunks.

“Basically, we saw that the coyotes were trying to avoid people,” said Summer Fink, lead author of the study and a University of Georgia doctoral candidate, said in a statement. “The animals didn’t want to den in areas where there was a lot of human activity and development.”

Some of the dens did incorporate human-related items: discarded piles of concrete, an overturned boat, and even a large, half-buried tractor tire. The researchers believe that the coyotes’ willingness to incorporate these human-made items into their dens shows the canines’  adaptability. That doesn’t mean they want to interact with people, though.

“Most people don’t even know coyotes live in our cities. This paper demonstrates that these animals are living and reproducing in the same spaces as us without people even realizing it,” added study co-author and ecologist Michel Kohl. “To me, this highlights how well coyotes are able to avoid us, which suggests that people’s fear of coyotes is often greater than the actual risk.”

Some dens were built near homes and buildings, but those houses were most often vacant and the buildings were abandoned. “It seemed like coyotes were perceiving that risk, realizing there weren’t people there and deciding to den in those locations,” Fink said.

The coyotes appear to be more concerned with their dens’ structural integrity. “As long as it was strong and it had visual cover around it to hide the coyotes from people seeing them, they were happy,” Kohl added.

The team put GPS collars on 48 urban coyotes in Atlanta, Georgia. All animals in the included images and videos are handled by trained wildlife professionals with legal permits. Image: UGA/University of Georgia. Leaping litters

Coyote packs typically include two to seven dogs. They live in every state except Hawaii and in every major city from Los Angeles to Chicago to Atlanta. This study found that in Georgia, coyotes give birth from mid-March through mid-April. In other parts of the country, coyote pupping season can last through mid-May. Litters generally range from two to nine pups. 

According to the Wolf Conservation Center in South Salem, New York, only the breeding pair in a coyote pack is allowed to reproduce. The other pack members help with hunting, babysitting duties, and defending their territory. Bringing food back for the new litter is essential to their survival, but coyotes are opportunistic eaters. They will consume what is easily available to them, typically small mammals such as mice and squirrels and anything seasonally abundant like berries. 

However, most pups in the den will not survive to adulthood, partially due to vehicle collisions, lack of food, and other human impacts.

“They’re an incredibly adaptive species, and they’re very intelligent,” Kohl said. “But there is likely a limit. As urbanization increases and denning locations become more limited, it is going to put further pressure on the ability of these coyote populations to sustain themselves in these urban landscapes.”

Coyotes typically have litters of two to nine pups. All animals in the included images and videos are handled by trained wildlife professionals with legal permits. Image: UGA/University of Georgia.

While coyotes may have a bad reputation for spreading disease and eating cats and dogs, they fill important ecological roles, particularly in cities and more urban areas. In these ecosystems, they can be the top predator, keeping rodents and other small mammal populations in check. They will also eat native plants and disperse the seeds in their feces. Coyotes are also scavengers and will feast on roadkill and clean up the environment.

“Without an apex predator, ecosystems can get all out of whack,” Fink said.

How to protect coyotes and their pups

While coyotes pose little danger to humans and pets, they are wild animals and will be protective of their young.

To keep coyotes and their pups safe, keep dogs on leashes during walks and don’t investigate holes that could potentially be coyote dens. Coyotes will often attempt to lead humans away from their dens if they believe they’ve been spotted rather than becoming aggressive. If you do see a coyote, avoid interacting with them.

“If you are close to a den, the parents may make themselves more visible, more noticeable,” Kohl said. “But that doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s something wrong with that coyote. It actually may be a behavioral ploy, so to speak, to try and get you to go somewhere else.”

Additionally, do not feed coyotes or run away from them. If you see one that appears sick or injured, report it to your local animal control office. 

The post Coyote pupping season is here. You can help keep them safe. appeared first on Popular Science.

Austin, United States, 19th March 2026, CyberNewswire

Beulah Louise Henry was just nine years old when she came up with her first invention in 1896, a device that allowed a man to tip his hat without ever putting down his newspaper. 

By her death in 1973, at the age of 85, she’d come up with so many more—a doll with eyes that changed color with the press of a button, a sewing machine without a bobbin (a threaded spool that slowed down work because it had to be frequently refilled), a clock designed to help kids learn to tell time, and others—that the press even dubbed Henry “Lady Edison.” 

Her ideas, she once told a reporter, were “messages from a guiding spirit.”

Beulah Louise Henry’s early life

Henry grew up a daughter of fortune in Raleigh, North Carolina. Her father Walter was a prominent lawyer and orator. Her mother, who was also named Beulah—a common tradition in the late 19th century—was a homemaker and the daughter of the state’s former governor. 

After high school, Henry went on to Elizabeth College, a short-lived, private Lutheran school for women in Charlotte. Henry hadn’t yet graduated when, in 1912, she received her first patent for a device she’d dreamed up while there: a vacuum ice cream maker designed to use both a motor and a hand crank (since electricity was still patchily distributed in those days), as well as minimal ice (which wasn’t widely available until the freezer came about a few decades later).

Female students at Elizabeth College gather to play a game of tennis in 1903. Image: Public Domain

Henry tried and failed to sell her “ice cream freezer” in Memphis, where her family had moved. But the city’s retailers and manufacturers had no interest in the apparatus. 

That same stony resistance stymied Henry’s next attempt at commercial success, a parasol with a snap-on cover that could be changed to match a woman’s outfit. Sometime around 1920, the family agreed to relocate to New York where their daughter’s ingenuity might be better appreciated. 

In Manhattan, Henry hoofed through the city’s streets and into its clattering manufacturers’ workshops day after day, trying to drum up interest in her interchangeable umbrella. But it was to no avail. They not only failed to see the invention’s potential, they told her the design was irreparably flawed, that it would be impossible to pierce the umbrella’s metal ribs with the snaps needed to hold the parasol cover in place.

How Henry’s tenacity led to her first commercial success

There were—and still remain today—both implicit and explicit biases against women inventors and some of the types of inventions they created, explains Kara Swanson, professor of law at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts. While, unlike many women of her time, Henry had both the financial resources and at least some of the educational background required to develop her snap-on parasol, the technological advancement was one whose commercial viability the men that staffed patent and manufacturing offices struggled to envision.

Henry, however, “was obviously strongly motivated,” says Swanson. After multiple rejections to build the parasol prototype she needed to sell her invention commercially, she eventually gave up and made it herself. By the mid-1920s, Henry had managed to secure the necessary patents and successfully licensed her umbrella for sale. Displayed in the windows of the department store Lord & Taylor, it sold like hot cakes.

How Beulah Louise Henry transformed into “Lady Edison”

Henry didn’t have to live out of hotels but like many upper-middle-class New Yorkers in the 1920s and ‘30s, she chose to for the sake of convenience. The mid-priced stays in Midtown gave Henry, a woman always brimming with new ideas, easy access to the patent attorneys, model makers, and retailers her entrepreneurship required. 

Despite never marrying or having children, Henry could see the potential the market in children’s toys held. Her next inventions captured the kiddie entertainment zeitgeist of the early-20th-century, including a realistic doll with a built-in radio, a water floaty anchored by inflatable swans, and a variety of different ways of sealing and covering air-filled balls. 

In January 1925, Henry debuted her “Radio Rose” doll. The doll had a loud speaking unit in her bisque skull, the bell of an eight inch horn in her chest, and a complete self-contained three tube radio set in her dress. The radio doll made its first broadcast at the Gimbel Brothers Department store in-house 500W radio station, WGBS. Image: Underwood Archives / Contributor / Getty Images Underwood Archives

These toys, along with a variety of devices used primarily by women—a special attachment that allowed typists to create a duplicate of a document without getting their hands dirty, an industrial sewing machine that made two parallel rows of stitching for stronger and more durable seams, and others—were Henry’s specialty. As advances geared towards women and children, it may have been harder for Henry to secure patents than it would have been for inventions geared towards men. Once they made it into stores, however, commercial success was almost a given. 

“Think about who was doing the daily shopping,” says Swanson. “Women were in the department stores, clothing stores, notion stores (shops specializing in sewing accessories), grocery stores.” 

Even more expensive items like dishwashers and washing machines that most early-20th century women would not have been able to buy without the assistance of a husband or father, were still advertised to them. “Manufacturers understood that women were very involved in purchase decisions,” she says.

Henry, herself, was the model of a new kind of independent woman. She worked late and danced later, her hair fashioned into a stylish bob. Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, even during the Great Depression, the inventor and her team at the Henry Umbrella and Parasol Company and, later, the B.L. Henry Company, turned out an average of more than two patents a year. 

“I invent because I cannot help myself,” Henry once said. Astonished by her prolific output, reporters drew the parallel between her and the New Jersey inventor of electricity. The moniker “Lady Edison” stuck with her for the rest of her life.

Henry’s eccentric lifestyle and invention empire

By the 1940s, the now middle-aged Henry was a public figure. She was considered proper and respected—if not somewhat eccentric. The suite of rooms she rented at the Hotel Seville on 29th and Madison Avenue was known to smell of incense and have a revolving door through which numerous pet birds, turtles, and a cat named Chickadee passed. She stationed a telescope by the window to gaze at the night sky.

After World War II, during which Henry joined the effort working at a machine shop, she returned to the inventing game with a slew of new ideas: Milka-Moo, a plush toy cow that spurted milk; a toy dog that consumed real food; an inflatable interior compartment that made dolls lighter weight and easier to clean; a device that continuously basted a roast with juice.

Beulah Louise Henry poses with her latest invention, a doll with an inflatable interior compartment that could be easily bathed. Image: Public Domain

Henry was granted her final patent, the 49th, for a new type of “direct and return” envelope in 1970. She’s believed to have come up with more than twice that many inventions over the span of her life, half of which never made it to the patent stage. Still, says Swisher, “it was rare for any inventor to [acquire so many patents],” regardless of their gender. 

It was another 36 years before Beulah Louise Henry finally shed her reputation as the female version of Thomas Edison. In 2006, she was recognized for her own brilliant mind by the National Inventors Hall of Fame.

In That Time When, Popular Science tells the weirdest, surprising, and little-known stories that shaped science, engineering, and innovation.

Related Stories

Windshield wipers’ overlooked female inventor

The forgotten story of the woman who invented the dishwasher

Pilates started in a WWI internment camp

4 times drinking coffee was illegal—or even punishable by death

The post Inventor Beulah Louise Henry’s unstoppable rise to becoming ‘Lady Edison’ appeared first on Popular Science.

Austin, TX, USA, 19th March 2026, CyberNewswire

Initial Super Heavy V3 and Starbase Pad 2 activation campaign complete, wrapping up several days of testing that loaded cryogenic fuel and oxidizer on a V3 vehicle for the first time. While the 10-engine static fire ended early due to a ground-side issue, we saw successful startup on all installed Raptor 3 engines. Next up: ...

Read more

Tesla FSD 14.3 is in testing right now. Wide release in a few weeks. It’s in testing right now. Wide release in a few weeks. — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 19, 2026 AI5 will punch far above its weight, because the entire Tesla AI software stack is designed to make maximally effective use of every ...

Read more

Nvidia has new level 4 chips for autonomous driving. Will this kill Tesla? They have 19 car partners who collectively can make 18 million cars per year. How many Nvidia Thor chips are installed in those cars ? How many cars have those partners created that are gathering data right now for self driving? Have ...

Read more

Designer crossbreed dogs are increasingly popular pets. By some estimates, the wider world of “doodles” alone rakes in over $1 billion dollars a year. Much of the rising interest is tied to claims that these mixed pooches possess more desirable aspects than many purebreeds or mutts. But according to a study published today in the journal PLOS One, at least three trendy designer breeds—labradoodles, cavapoos, and cockapoos—display more problematic traits than at least one of their origin breeds.

The latest findings come from a survey of dog owners in the United Kingdom representing 9,402 cavapoos, cockapoos, and labradoodles. Each crossbreed comes from a poodle bred with a cavalier King Charles spaniel, cocker spaniel, or Labrador retriever. Animal behavioralists from the Royal Veterinary College used an industry standard review called the Canine Behavioral Assessment and Research Questionnaire (C-BARQ), to collect data on behavioral traits such as aggression, excitability, and trainability. 

Their results contradict some of the most popular assumptions about these crossbreed dogs. In over 44 percent of comparisons, a crossbreed had more undesirable aspects than their purebred progenitors including excess energy, separation anxiety, and more. Meanwhile, they did not find any notable differences in nearly 46 percent of comparisons, and less than 10 percent of crossbreeds displayed fewer issues.

But if you had to pick one of the three canine types, the study suggests avoiding cockapoos. These dogs scored worse than their parent breeds in 16 of the 24 behaviors, particularly when it came to owner-directed anger and excitability. Cavapoos came in second place, with worse scores in 11 out of 24 areas, although labradoodles appear to fare the best. These dogs only scored worse in five areas and actually ranked better in six subjects like aggression towards other pets.

While the findings aren’t a condemnation of any one specific crossbreed, the study’s authors hope the new information will help dispel ongoing myths about designer dogs. At the very least, pet owners should know what they’re in for when they bring their new four-legged friend home.

The post Cockapoos, doodles, and other crossbreeds have behavioral problems, too appeared first on Popular Science.

Over 200 colorful minerals will hit the auction block on March 20 as part of Heritage’s The Collection of William and Ruth Loomis Fine Minerals Signature® Auction. What started as a shared hobby evolved into a lifelong passion that soon will be offered to mineral collectors everywhere. Soon after marrying in 1987, the pair opened Loomis Minerals in Flagstaff, Arizona, which became the hub for their finds. 

“William and Ruth Loomis dedicated much of their adult lives to building this enticing collection, and their vast knowledge shines through in the lots that will cross the block in this auction,” Nic Valenzuela, Heritage’s Director of Fine Minerals, said in a statement. “This presents an opportunity to bid on some exceptional minerals from some of the most important mines around the world.”

Check out some of the items up for bid below. (Click to expand images to full screen.)

This aquamarine with muscovite was found in Nagar District in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. It is roughly the size of a cabinet and is largely composed of one massive crystal with a glassy luster and vibrant sky blue zoning and shiny bladed muscovite associations. Image: Heritage Auctions. Native gold from the Harvard Mine in the Jamestown District in Tuolumne County, California. This mine was among the first to be discovered in 1848, at the beginning of the American Gold Rush. Despite their rarity, when compared to the gold found in nuggets or veins, crystallized gold specimens often have a level of history and even aesthetics that go beyond their bullion value. This particular piece is 3.66 inches long and presented against a white quartz to contrast with its yellow color. Image: Heritage Auctions. This colorful elbaite (tourmaline) and quartz comes from Paprok, Afghanistan. The main focus of this particular specimen is a single immense, heavily striated, prismatic crystal that rises to a complex termination and is partially wreathed by striking parallel growths. This crystal is polychromatic, showing vibrant layers of deep red and pink that are topped by yellow, grass-green and blue-green zoning. Image: Heritage Auctions. 
This zincite is from Silesian Voivodeship in Poland and is 12 inches long in each direction. Zincite rarely occurs as crystallized examples in nature, apart from at a couple of localities. Similar to other zincites found throughout Poland’s various zinc smelting sites, this piece was found lining the interior of the smelter’s smokestack. Most of the hexagonal crystals are arranged in a jackstraw cluster of needle-shaped growths that come to very thin points. Image: Heritage Auctions. Opalized wood from Virgin Valley in Humboldt County, Nevada. It’s 12.68 inches long and boasts an extremely colorful field of opal,  showing large swatches of violet, blue, and green that cover most of the piece. Image: Heritage Auctions. The auction includes 20 tourmalines, including this tourmaline with lepidolite and smoky quartz from Paprok in the Kamdesh District in Nuristan, Afghanistan. It’s 7.64 inches long and has a large tourmaline crystal joined by dense clusters of lepidolite and associations of smoky quartz. It’s pink hue that is most intense at its core. Image: Heritage Auctions This schorl with goshenite comes from the Erongo Mountains in Namibia. It’s 4.45 inches long, and its schorl crystals intertwine in every direction. Hexagonal crystals of goshenite—a colorless variety of beryl—are also all over the mineral helping contrast with the black. Image: Heritage Auctions.

Images and information about all lots in the auction can be found at HA.com/8244.

The post 7 glittery minerals up for auction appeared first on Popular Science.

Microsoft is threatening to sue OpenAI over the February 2026 Amazon $50B investment and $100B cloud-expansion deal. Microsoft says the Frontier agent platform on AWS (stateful runtime) violates the Azure exclusivity for stateless OpenAI APIs that was in the original ~$13B Microsoft investment agreements (updated Sept 2025). Microsoft publicly restated Azure remains the exclusive cloud ...

Read more

Humans have inherited many ancient values mainly encoded in DNA. These are mostly negative values, about avoid things like death, pain, hunger, cold, injury, boredom, confusion, loneliness, etc. Our main ancient positive values are social, about wanting allies, respect, sex, progeny, etc.

But we are quite reluctant to admit that social values are our main positive values. So our cultures give us other varied “sacred” positive values to focus on and aspire to. While these sacred values seem to function in practice mainly to help us achieve our social values, it is important to us that we not see them this way. So each culture gives its members distinctive high positive values. Like their versions of freedom, purity, honor, justice, equality, art, exploration, and inquiry.

However, when our culture shows us several different such grand values, or we are exposed to different subcultures, how do we rank such values? Yes, we have a norm that sacred values don’t conflict. But we are at times forced to see that two values do in fact conflict, which we then resolve this by deciding that the lower one can’t really be sacred. To do this, we need a way to pick which value is higher.

George Simmel, “founding figure of sociology”, in 1900 published The Philosophy of Money, wherein he argued (quotes below) that a common human heuristic is that we judge our highest values to be those that we, or people like us, have recently sacrificed the most to achieve, via suffering those negatives that we usually try to avoid.

For example, Christians see the great value of God’s love in the sacrifice of his son Christ, and the value of Christianity in the sacrifices of martyrs, monks, and soldiers in religions wars. Citizens see the great value of their nation in the many harsh wars to promote that nation. Professionals see the value of their profession in the sacrifice of potential, years of practice, and hours per day of devoted work. Activists see the value of their causes in the suffering of advocates at the hands of opponents. We have record levels of spending on education, medicine, and legal process, and record levels of confidence in the high value of such spending.

You see, we humans aren’t satisfied to just enjoy tasty nutritious easily-prepared food. But foodies can hope that expensive ingredients, difficult preparation methods, and exceptional skilled cooks may deliver sensory nuance, harmony of composition, craft appreciation, place authenticity, novelty, and narrative. Enough of that and they hope to rise above the mundane to touch the sacred.

And we can’t just be entertained by engaging stories amid pleasing views in movies. But cinéphiles can hope that movie-makers’ artistic excellence and deep insight into human nature, obtained at great personal cost, can be combined with viewers’ careful attention, multiple viewings, literacy, and tolerance for ambiguity to let them see deeply, access serious emotions, encounter other minds and worlds, and join the community of those who “get it”. Which rises above the mundane to touch the sacred.

Now if we had some independent and strong grip on our greatest values, then we might only sacrifice for them when and to the degree that such sacrifice actually best achieved those values. But when we don’t have much of a way to tell which are our greatest values, but instead infer our values to be whatever we most sacrifice for, this can create self-reinforcing cycles that create great suffering.

For example, if we see that our greatest sacrifices lately have been for religion, we try harder to push more of us to be more strictly religious, via more personal sacrifice, and to convert outsiders, which cases suffering via conflict. If our greatest sacrifices have been wars to promote our nations, religions, or ideologies, then we get more eager to promote such things via new wars.

If our greatest sacrifices recently have been in culture wars, we get more eager to push for faster bigger cultural change, especially along the dimensions where we have faced opposition. For example, high levels of social conflict and sacrifice induced by recent “defund the police” initiatives on one side, and by anti-immigrant efforts on the other side, was probably part of the appeal of both approaches.

This makes me better appreciate ancient societies that spent huge fractions of their available labor on monumental architecture, and also that did lots of human sacrifice.

The longer the period where we have not seen great sacrifices lately, the more we fear that we have become decadent, selfish, profane, and have lost touch with higher values and deeper meanings. And the more eager we become to induce and join big sacrifice activities. For example, WWI ended an unusually long period of European peace and prosperity, and saw an unusually great enthusiasm for war on all sides.

Today we have also seen an unusually long period of peace and prosperity. I predict this will not last. We will come more see ourselves as out of touch with our grand values, and become more open and even eager for actions that induce new regimes of great sacrifice. Periodic high rates of sacrifice will probably continue for as long as we humans (or our AI descendants) use sacrifice as our key indicator of our top grand values. We really need to find a better way to find and affirm our highest values.

Those Simmel quotes:

Even superficial psychological observation discloses instances in which the sacrifice not only increases the value of the desired object but actually brings it about. This process reveals the desire to prove one’s strength, to overcome difficulties, or even simply to be contrary. The necessity of proceeding in a roundabout way in order to acquire certain things is often the occasion, and often also the reason, for considering them valuable. In human relations, and most frequently and clearly in erotic relations, it is apparent that reserve, indifference or rejection incite the most passionate desire to overcome these barriers, and are the cause of efforts and sacrifices that, in many cases, the goal would not have seemed to deserve were it not for such opposition. …

Moral merit always signifies that opposing impulses and desires had to be conquered and sacrificed in favour of the morally desirable act. If such an act is carried out without any difficulty as a result of natural impulse, it will not be considered to have a subjective moral value, no matter how desirable its objective content. Moral merit is attained only by the sacrifice of lower and yet very tempting goods, and it is the greater the more inviting the temptations and the more comprehensive and difficult the sacrifice. Of all human achievements the highest honour and appreciation is given to those that indicate, or at least seem to indicate, a maximum of commitment, energy and persistent concentration of the whole being, and along with this, renunciation, sacrifice of everything else, and devotion to the objective idea.

Our ancient ancestors loved their birch tar. Neanderthals likely used the sticky substance to build and repair tools, but it also may have had another important use. With its antibiotic properties, birch tar could also treat wounds. The findings are detailed in a study published today in the journal PLOS One.

Long believed to be one of the less advanced Homo species, recent studies have shown that Neanderthals built tools, collected random items, and even made art using a type of crayon. Archaeologists frequently find birch tar at Neanderthal archaeological sites, which comes from birch trees. Some researchers have questioned if Neanderthals were using it for more than just making tools. Indigenous communities in northern Europe and Canada treat wounds with birch tar and there is growing evidence that Neanderthals employed a variety of medical practices, including helping their sick or injured comrades.

To investigate birch tar’s medicinal potential, the team extracted tar from modern birch tree bark, specifically targeting tree species known from Neanderthal sites. They used multiple extraction methods that Neanderthals would have used, including distilling the tar in a clay pit and condensing it against a stone surface. 

“The messiness of birch tar production deserves a special mention,” the study’s co-authors wrote in a joint statement. “Every step of the production is a sensory experience in itself, and getting the tar off our hands after spending hours at the fire has been a challenge every time.”

In the lab, the team exposed the tar samples to different strains of bacteria. All of the tar samples were effective at hindering the growth of Staphylococcus bacteria known to cause wound infections.

Related Neanderthal Stories

Neanderthals may have enjoyed collecting tchotchkes—just like us

Neanderthals likely used glue to make tools

The Neanderthals who ate their neighbors

Neanderthals’ social isolation may have sped up their extinction

According to the team, these experiments support the efficacy of Indigenous medicinal practices, and also reinforce the possibility that Neanderthals used birch tar to treat their own wounds. It also may have been used as an insect repellent.

“We found that the birch tar produced by Neanderthals and early humans had antibacterial properties,” the team said. “This has important implications for how Neanderthals may have mitigated disease burden during the last Ice Ages, and adds to a growing set of evidence on healthcare in these early human communities.”

Future studies of the potential uses of these natural ingredients could also lead to a more thorough understanding of a lost Neanderthal culture and could have a direct impact on the future of medicine as antibiotic resistance grows. 

“By bringing together research on indigenous pharmacology and experimental archaeology, we begin to understand the medicinal practices of our distant human ancestors and their closest cousins,” the team concluded. “Additionally, this study of ‘palaeopharmacology’ can contribute to the rediscovery of antibiotic remedies whilst we face an ever more pressing antimicrobial resistance crisis.”

The post Neanderthals used antibiotics, new experiment suggests appeared first on Popular Science.

Organic molecules delivered from extraterrestrial materials may have played a key role in supplying building blocks for life on Earth. Scientists have found all five canonical nucleobases—purines (adenine and guanine) and pyrimidines (cytosine, thymine and uracil)—in samples returned from the C-type asteroid (162173) Ryugu by JAXA’s Hayabusa2 mission. This likely means that organic molecule building ...

Read more

Web3 infrastructure and professional athletics never appeared to be a match in the early days of crypto, but they’ve proven to be a match made in heaven. It began as a niche interest in digital collectibles, hosted on the sports blockchain, but has since turned into a robust infrastructure that is changing how sports franchises ...

Read more