NewzIntel.com

Category: Analysis Assessment

  • MIL-Evening Report: Workers need better tools and tech to boost productivity. Why aren’t companies stepping up to invest?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Head, Canberra School of Government, University of Canberra

    As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Treasurer Jim Chalmers turn their attention to improving productivity growth across the economy, it will be interesting to see what the business community brings to a planned summit in August.

    Labour productivity (output per hour worked) has barely grown this decade.

    Much of the focus in the current debate has been on the role of workers (labour) and industrial relations. Less discussed has been low business investment (capital).

    Labour will be more productive if each worker can use more capital: machinery, equipment and technology. Over the medium term, providing workers with more capital – “capital deepening”, in the jargon – tends to be the main contributor to labour productivity growth.

    But business investment as a share of gross domestic product (GDP) is currently at its lowest level since the mid-1990s.

    Investment is low in both the mining and non-mining sectors. In the latest national accounts report for the March quarter, business investment in machinery and equipment fell 1.7%.

    The average worker now uses less capital equipment – machines and computers – than a decade ago. Investment just hasn’t kept pace with growth in employment.



    Read more:
    ‘Hard to measure and difficult to shift’: the government’s big productivity challenge

    Why is investment so weak?

    One possible reason was put forward by then Reserve Bank governor Philip Lowe in 2023. He suggested that, during the COVID pandemic, firms concentrated on surviving. Seeking out more efficient ways to produce was a lower priority. But post-pandemic, firms seem to have been slow to pivot back to an efficiency focus.

    Another reason may be that, until recently, wage growth has been slower than the growth in prices of goods and services produced. This may have reduced the incentives for firms to invest in the equipment needed to boost labour productivity.

    A key driver of investment is profitability. Firms are more likely to fund investment from retained earnings than by borrowing or raising capital. But the share of corporate profits in the economy has been quite high in recent years. So this does not explain low investment.

    The ‘animal spirits’ are lacking

    Business confidence – what economist John Maynard Keynes famously called “animal spirits” – is another important driver.

    Share prices, both in Australia and the rest of the world, have grown strongly in recent years. The S&P/ASX 200 index of Australian share prices is close to its all-time high. This would suggest financial markets are very optimistic about the prospects of Australian companies.

    Direct surveys of Australian businesses from National Australia Bank suggest conditions (the current situation) and confidence (about the future) are around their long-term average level. So this also does not explain the low investment.

    One contributor to low investment may be that firms are applying inappropriately high “hurdle rates”. These refer to the minimum return firms expect from an investment before they will undertake it.

    Hurdle rates tend to be “sticky” over time, meaning they do not move much. Many companies still apply hurdle rates of over 12%. These were appropriate back when interest rates and inflation were much higher, but seem too high now as borrowing costs have fallen with interest rate cuts.

    The Productivity Commission has suggested one contributor to low investment could be a higher risk premium. Since the global financial crisis in 2007-08, companies and investors may have become more cautious about taking on risk.

    Another factor could be growing market power of Australian companies that dominate a sector, making them complacent rather than striving to improve their performance.

    The high degree of uncertainty

    The Reserve Bank recently compiled two measures of uncertainty. One is derived from stock markets. The other is based on the number of news articles about policy uncertainty.

    Both show the current environment is as uncertain now as it was during the early stages of the global financial crisis in 2007–08 and the COVID pandemic.

    Investment in machineray and equipment went backwards in the March quarter.
    Parilov/Shutterstock

    A common response to uncertainty is to defer decisions on both investment and hiring new workers until the outlook is clearer. A study by the Reserve Bank found that greater uncertainty did indeed reduce investment. But the size of the impact was – you guessed it – uncertain.

    What can be done?

    Business lobbies often attribute low rates of investment (and anything else they think people may not like) to “excessively high” corporate tax rates. But at 30% for large companies and 25% for small, the company tax rate is low by historical standards.

    Some multinational firms may be deterred from entering the Australian market as our company tax rate is above that in some other jurisdictions. It is hard to tell how important this effect is. Company tax is only one of many factors that affect the comparative risk and return of Australia as an investment destination.

    The Productivity Commission is investigating whether the corporate taxation system could be made more efficient rather than just lowering rates.

    In the meantime, however, firms may be encouraged to invest more by a more stable domestic economic outlook. Inflation is back within the central bank’s 2-3% target range. Employment is around an all-time high proportion of the working age population. The election has removed some political uncertainty with a government holding a clear majority.

    Businesses should stop whingeing and start providing workers with the tools they need to become more productive.

    This article is part of The Conversation’s series, The Productivity Puzzle. Read the previous article here.

    John Hawkins was formerly a senior economist in the Reserve Bank and the Australian Treasury.

    – ref. Workers need better tools and tech to boost productivity. Why aren’t companies stepping up to invest? – https://theconversation.com/workers-need-better-tools-and-tech-to-boost-productivity-why-arent-companies-stepping-up-to-invest-257806

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: With Trump undoing years of progress, can the US salvage its Pacific Islands strategy?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan Tidwell, Director, Center for Australian, New Zealand and Pacific Studies, Georgetown University

    Donald Trump signs a proclamation expanding fishing rights in the Pacific Islands, April 17. Getty Images

    Since 2018, the United States has worked, albeit often haltingly, to regain its footing with Pacific Island countries. It’s done this largely by reflecting a sentiment familiar in Pacific capitals: the region is not a geopolitical backwater, but a crucial strategic zone in the 21st century.

    Spurred by China’s strategic expansion – security deals, port access, political influence – the first Trump presidency and then the Biden administration renewed the US focus on the Pacific.

    Washington was also prodded by regional allies, including New Zealand. In 2018, Foreign Minister Winston Peters said: “We unashamedly ask for the United States to engage more and we think it is in your vital interests to do so. And time is of the essence.”

    Building on the tentative steps of its predecessor, the Biden administration acted. It opened new embassies, invited Pacific leaders to the White House, unveiled a dedicated strategy for the Pacific Islands, and committed to recognising the Cook Islands and Niue.

    It also negotiated more funding for the Compacts of Free Association with the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands and Palau. Along with the 2022 Pacific Islands Summit, it all signalled Washington’s desire to be a better partner.

    Crucially, the Biden administration recognised climate change and the economy, not great-power rivalry, as the region’s defining security concerns. Now, much of that progress is being eroded.

    The second Trump administration has gutted key international development agencies, with the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Millennium Challenge Corporation shuttered.

    More than mere symbols, these agencies were tools of statecraft, facilitating Washington’s capacity to compete with China’s “no questions asked” development model. Their removal leaves a vacuum, which Beijing will happily fill.

    China pressing the advantage

    Other signs of retreat are equally troubling. Congressional funding for the South Pacific Tuna Treaty – which pays for access for US fishing fleets and is the primary multiparty agreement the US has with the Pacific Islands – was tripled by Biden, but remains incomplete.

    Trump recently signed an executive order opening the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument, a 1,282,534 square kilometre protected marine zone, to commercial fishing. This might be welcomed by the US tuna fleet, but it raises questions about Washington’s commitment to the tuna treaty.

    Hoped-for expansion of US consular access, especially vital for Pacific Islanders who must travel long distances for basic services such as visa applications, is in limbo. The US embassy in Vanuatu, damaged by the earthquake in 2024, remains closed, leaving diplomats to work out of their hotel rooms.

    China, by contrast, has not slowed down. Its security pact with Solomon Islands, its police training efforts in Samoa and Kiribati, and its growing intelligence presence across the region show a clear pattern of assertiveness.

    Beijing has proven adept at offering timely, visible assistance. Its diplomats show up. Its companies build. Its promises, however opaque, are matched with resources.

    The result has not necessarily meant Pacific nations have “chosen” China. Rather, most revert to the longstanding posture of “friend to all, enemy to none”.

    In a region where non-alignment is both a survival strategy and a principle of sovereignty, the perception of US unreliability makes China’s attentions all the more welcome, or at least tolerable.

    Not a binary contest

    The US now appears to be abandoning efforts to break this cycle, and the Trump administration risks a genuine strategic error rather than a mere diplomatic misstep.

    More than distant dots on a map, the Pacific Islands control vast stretches of ocean, including key shipping lanes and undersea cables. Their diplomatic weight matters in the United Nations.

    And the region matters to Taiwan, which is recognised by 12 countries globally, three of which are in the Pacific.

    Some argue the US should press Pacific nations to “choose” between Washington and Beijing. But that approach is shortsighted and counterproductive.

    Most have no interest in being drawn into a binary contest. They seek concrete benefits – resilience funding, fair trade, visa access – not ideological alignment. Framing relationships as zero-sum contests misunderstands the region’s diplomatic logic.

    Listening to Pacific leaders

    To revive the relationship, the US will need to show up, follow through and demonstrate its partnership offers more than rhetoric.

    This would involve restoring some elements of foreign assistance, fully funding the South Pacific Tuna Treaty obligations, opening and staffing embassies, and supporting Pacific regional organisations such as the Pacific Islands Forum with meaningful recognition and resources.

    But the US review of Pacific foreign assistance (a small portion of US development aid formerly administered by USAID) has been delayed once again, and likely won’t emerge until mid-July.

    More importantly, the US will have to listen to Pacific leaders, who have articulated their priorities clearly. They do not want to be sites of contest; they want to be agents of their own futures.

    In short, the US will have to treat the Pacific Islands as sovereign equals.
    When Trump returned to the White House, he found a workable policy architecture for the Pacific. Its core elements could still be rescued.

    But continued neglect, mixed signals and cost-cutting risk hastening the outcome China seeks – a region that finds Washington unreliable. Winston Peters, now foreign minister in a new government, might want to update his 2018 call for US engagement in the Pacific – with the emphasis on reliability.

    Alan Tidwell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. With Trump undoing years of progress, can the US salvage its Pacific Islands strategy? – https://theconversation.com/with-trump-undoing-years-of-progress-can-the-us-salvage-its-pacific-islands-strategy-258679

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: It took more than a century, but women are taking charge of Australia’s economy – here’s why it matters

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Duygu Yengin, Associate Professor of Economics, University of Adelaide

    For the first time in its 124-year history, Treasury will be led by a woman.

    Jenny Wilkinson’s appointment is historic in its own right. Even more remarkable is the fact she joins Michele Bullock at the Reserve Bank and Danielle Wood at the Productivity Commission.

    Australia’s three most powerful economic institutions are now led by women economists. In economics, this is not normal. But it certainly does matter.

    Stubbornly male

    Imagine if only 17% of economics professors were men. It would feel unusual; people would ask why the field was so heavily skewed. But the reality is the opposite: 83% of economics professors in Australia are male.

    And yet, this imbalance is almost invisible. Women make up just about one-third of secondary pupils studying economics and 40% of students enrolled in economics courses at university.

    In the private sector, women economists are roughly one in three.

    So while the appointments of Wilkinson, Bullock and Wood feels groundbreaking, the profession as a whole remains stubbornly male. Still, the leadership story is worth celebrating. When young women see leaders who look like them, they’re more likely to imagine themselves in those roles too.

    As women increasingly take the helm, the old stereotype of a suit-clad man with a briefcase gives way to a broader, more inclusive image of what an economist can be.

    The public service is leading the charge. As of 2023, women held 53% of senior executive service positions in the Australian Public Service, up from 46% in 2019.

    Merit and diversity

    Thankfully, unlike other parts of the world, we live in a country where these appointments haven’t triggered claims of so-called “diversity hires”. To be clear: these female pioneers weren’t appointed because they are women.

    Each has decades of experience, technical firepower, and deep policy credentials. Wilkinson has led the Department of Finance and the Parliamentary Budget Office. Bullock has held almost every senior role at the Reserve Bank. Wood has shaped public debates on intergenerational equity and tax reform with clarity and rigour.

    The idea that diversity is somehow in tension with merit is a false binary. Diverse groups make better decisions and are more creative, especially in high-stakes settings.

    Decades of economics and business research has shown that incorporating diverse perspectives into decision-making only strengthens the outcomes. Decisions made and executed by diverse teams delivered 60% better results than those by non-diverse teams.

    Merit isn’t just what’s on paper, it’s shaped by how we judge it.

    When men and women perform equally well, success is more often credited to skill for men and to luck for women. Swap a male name for a female one on a CV, teaching evaluation or reference letter, and perceptions of competence, leadership and hireability start to shift.

    These unconscious biases don’t just affect who gets ahead; they shape how we define merit in the first place.

    Will it make a difference?

    Economics often prides itself on being objective and neutral. While the economic models may be technically gender-blind, the questions we ask and investigate rarely are.

    This is where gender diversity matters – not just in who holds the top jobs, but in what gets researched and how decisions are made. There’s growing evidence male and female economists don’t just ask different questions, they also approach problems differently.

    One study found female central bankers tend to act with greater independence and deliver lower inflation. A United States study and another in Europe showed striking gender differences in how economists think about a range of areas, including labour markets, taxation, health and the environment, and more broadly on public spending – everything from welfare to the military.

    Having more diverse perspectives doesn’t dilute economics – it deepens it. It makes the discipline more responsive to the diversity of the real-world challenges it’s meant to address.

    Economic policies impact the whole society. So does the composition of economists.

    So, what’s next?

    Of course, three women in top economic roles won’t create miracles overnight – they all operate within existing systems and structures.

    So, what can we expect from Wilkinson’s leadership? Her time at the Department of Finance suggests a steady, pragmatic hand: consultative, strategic and deeply experienced.

    Wilkinson brings bipartisan credibility, a sharp grasp of fiscal discipline, and the capacity to act decisively in a crisis, as we saw during COVID. She won’t remake Treasury overnight, but she’s well placed to lead it with rigour, integrity and a long-term view.

    This moment matters for women in economics. It shows change is possible in the profession, and it could mark the start of economic policy that truly reflects the diversity of the people it serves.

    Duygu Yengin is affiliated with the University of Adelaide, Women in Economics Network, and the Economic Society of Australia.

    – ref. It took more than a century, but women are taking charge of Australia’s economy – here’s why it matters – https://theconversation.com/it-took-more-than-a-century-but-women-are-taking-charge-of-australias-economy-heres-why-it-matters-258680

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Sunday Too Far Away at 50: how a story about Aussie shearers launched a local film industry

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michael Walsh, Associate Professor, Screen and Media, Flinders University

    Released 50 years ago, Sunday Too Far Away deals episodically with a group of shearers led by Foley (Jack Thompson), and the events leading up to the national shearers’ strike of 1956.

    The shearers are a ragtag group held together by rum, unionism and competitiveness – as Foley must deal with the camp cook from hell, as well as a threat to his “gun” status.

    As we celebrate the anniversary, it is hard to overstate its importance for the Australian film industry and for its producer, the South Australian Film Corporation (SAFC).

    The beginnings of a funding body

    After the Liberal and Country League had held control over the state government for 32 years under a “Playmander”, named for premier Thomas Playford, the Labor party, lead by Don Dunstan, was elected in 1970 on a progressive platform.

    As part of Dunstan’s project of moving the state’s economy away from its Playford-era reliance on manufacturing to more knowledge-based service industries, the SAFC was founded in 1972.

    Central to Dunstan’s plan was the imperative that the SAFC should produce feature films – despite an initial consultant’s report that advised against this.

    Dunstan’s plan was visionary, making South Australia the first state government to directly produce features. But it was also flawed.

    The Dunstan government authorised the SAFC to borrow A$400,000 (approximately $5 million in 2025 money) for the production of up to five features per year, with the remainder of the budgets coming from Commonwealth funds and private investors.

    Don Dunstan, then premier of South Australia, around 1972 when the South Australian Film Corporation was established.
    State Library of South Australia B 64310/106

    The plan was that the SAFC’s productions would be self-supporting within five years, with the initial pump-priming loans repaid.

    By 1973 a slate of features was in the works, though none would reach production.

    One of these was Gallipoli, to be made in conjunction with Melbourne-based Crawford Productions, with screenwriter John Dingwell attached.

    The film was shelved, but Dingwell maintained his relationship with Matt Carroll, the SAFC’s head of feature production. They developed a script titled Shearers, based on anecdotes from one of Dingwell’s relatives.

    Sunday Too Far Away (as the film was retitled) was budgeted at $231,000, with the Commonwealth Government’s Australian Film Development Corporation, established in 1970 to invest in local films, providing half this figure.

    An ‘emotional experience’

    Gil Brealey, the SAFC’s first CEO, was desperate to get a feature started and was prepared to find the whole of the budget if necessary. (The SAFC would put up an additional $14,000 in budget overruns caused by wet weather in the semi-arid locations around Port Augusta and Quorn.)

    It was a remarkable demonstration of maximum involvement by a government body intent on intervening dramatically to generate a production industry in a state that would otherwise lose out to the larger states on the eastern seaboard.

    At the recent 50th anniversary screening hosted by the SAFC, producer Matt Carroll referred to the film shoot as “an extraordinary emotional experience” for all involved, stressing the strong camaraderie among the actors, which mirrored that of the shearers in the film.

    It is useful to compare Sunday to 1971’s Wake in Fright.

    Both centre on rural male mateship, but while Wake in Fright is revolted by it, Sunday strives for an elegiac celebration that might have drawn from Henry Lawson, of union-based mateship as the only defence again the harshness of life.

    Fraught politics

    Brealey and the SAFC were functioning under enormous political pressure for this film to be not only a critical, but also a popular success.

    From the outset, the SAFC had been identified with Dunstan, and it was under almost daily attack in Parliament, led by Liberal frontbencher Stan Evans.

    Quoted in the Adelaide Advertiser in May 1975, Evans denounced the SAFC “for actively producing and manufacturing films when its role under the Act precluded it from this field”.

    He was joined in these attacks by elements of the local press, as well as a handful of filmmakers who felt slighted by talent imported by Brealey.

    The board was forced to issue a statement, complaining of

    a very small vocal minority who, apparently, find the success of the corporation personally offensive and make every effort to ‘knock’ its work.

    The acceptance of the film into the Directors’ Fortnight at Cannes, the first Australian film bestowed the honour, was a godsend. It went on to win eight of the 12 awards on offer at the Australian Film Institute Awards.

    Brealey wryly told me that “we had this appalling reputation in Adelaide and everyone else thought we were marvellous”.

    The film renaissance

    In order to shore up its local standing, the SAFC ran a film day at the Adelaide Festival Centre, culminating in a “world premiere” of Sunday attended by Gough Whitlam.

    The next day, the SAFC released the film itself in Adelaide, hiring the Warner cinema where it ran for 26 weeks under an arrangement that gave the producer the entire gross, less the exhibitor’s expenses.

    Brealey was extremely suspicious of Australian distributors. Roadshow distributed the film throughout the rest of Australia. By October, they were reporting box office grosses of over $182,000 – though the SAFC had only received $11,000 in returns.

    The bitter lesson was that SAFC had clearly been founded on overly optimistic expectations of returns to producers. Feature production in Australia would need on-going government support.

    The success of Sunday Too Far Away, followed closely by Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975) and Storm Boy (1976) succeeded in establishing the SAFC as a prime mover in Australian film.

    Locally, it won bipartisan local support for the SAFC and nationally it established a model for emulation by other states.

    It demonstrated that Australian films could combine local and international appeal, and that government agencies had a vital role at the heart of the film renaissance.

    Michael Walsh is a consultant for the SAFC on its digitisation project. He has previously written a commissioned history for the organisation.

    – ref. Sunday Too Far Away at 50: how a story about Aussie shearers launched a local film industry – https://theconversation.com/sunday-too-far-away-at-50-how-a-story-about-aussie-shearers-launched-a-local-film-industry-258576

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ‘Like an underwater bushfire’: SA’s marine algal bloom is still killing almost everything in its path

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Barrera, PhD Candidate, School of Public Health, University of Adelaide

    Paul Macdonald of Edithburgh Diving

    South Australian beaches have been awash with foamy, discoloured water and dead marine life for months. The problem hasn’t gone away; it has spread.

    Devastating scenes of death and destruction mobilised locals along the Fleurieu Peninsula, Yorke Peninsula and Kangaroo Island. The state government has hosted emergency meetings, most recently with marine and environment experts from around Australia, and issued weekly updates.

    Unfortunately, there are few ways to stop the bloom. Scientists had hoped strong westerly winds would break it up and push it out to sea. But so far, the wild weather has just pushed it through the Murray Mouth into the Coorong. And even if the bloom is washed away this winter, it could return in spring.

    This bloom represents a stark warning to coastal communities, as well as tourism, seafood and aquaculture industries. It’s a sign of what’s to come, in Australia and around the world, as the oceans warm.

    South Australia’s marine emblem, the leafy sea dragon, washed up on Stokes Bay in Kangaroo Island during the harmful algal bloom.
    RAD KI

    An unprecedented algal bloom

    The first sign of trouble came in March this year, when dozens of surfers and beachgoers fell ill. Many reported sore eyes, coughing or trouble breathing.

    Water testing soon revealed the cause: a harmful algal bloom of Karenia mikimotoi.

    Most people felt better within hours or days of leaving the beach. But marine life of all kinds was washing up dead or dying.

    Fish habitat charity OzFish set up a new citizen science project to capture the data, using iNaturalist.

    OzFish SA project manager Brad Martin told a public forum the bloom was like an “underwater bushfire”, adding:

    It’s suffocating fish, it’s taking the oxygen out of the water and it’s producing toxins.

    Photos of dead fish, seahorses, octopuses and rays were already circulating on social media. So OzFish encouraged people to start using iNaturalist, to identify the species and capture the data.

    The data shows more than 200 species of marine creatures died, including 100 types of fish and sharks. This includes popular recreational fishing species such as flathead, squid, crabs and rock lobsters.

    Almost half the deaths were ray-finned fish species. A quarter were sharks and ray species. Then came soft-bodied “cephalopods” such as cuttlefish and octopus, and crustaceans such as crabs, lobsters and prawns.

    Most of these species live on or near the sea floor with small home ranges. As in a bushfire, they have little chance of escape. Other fish that live in the open ocean, such as whiting, snapper and tuna, can swim away.

    Ray-finned fish, sharks and rays dominate the death toll from the marine algal bloom, as recorded on iNaturalist.
    Brad Martin, OzFish

    The culprit

    K. mikimotoi is a type of microalgae. It uses sunlight and carbon dioxide to grow and divide, releasing oxygen.

    In calm conditions, with plenty of light and warmth, the algal cells divide rapidly. Ideal conditions for algal growth are becoming more common as the climate changes and seas warm.

    Algal toxins are known to cause illness and sometimes death in humans, pets and livestock.

    K. mikimotoi is lethal to marine life, not humans. But the toxic effects in marine life are complicated and poorly understood.

    The algae irritates fish gills, causing cell death and bleeding. It also causes hypoxia, or lack of oxygen in the blood. And when the algae die off, decomposition consumes huge amounts of oxygen – leaving marine life to suffocate.

    Scientists now suspect other Karenia species may be involved too, due to the detection of brevetoxins in shellfish. This is the first detection of brevetoxins in Australia.

    Grim scenes greeted divers in murky water at Edithburgh on the Yorke Peninsula. (Paul Macdonald of Edithburgh Diving)

    What can be done?

    A marine heatwave is largely to blame. Sea surface temperatures have been 2.5°C warmer than usual since September. Relatively calm conditions, with little wind and small swells, also enabled the bloom to grow. Now it’s a matter of waiting for strong westerly winds to blow it all away.

    The latest update shows sea surface temperatures have stabilised. But deeper gulf and shelf waters remain 1–2°C above average for this time of the year.

    Climate change is making future blooms more likely. So tackling climate change is one way to help.

    Another is minimising the runoff of nutrients into waterways. Microalgae can be found anywhere with enough water, light and nutrients. So reducing pollution can help reduce the risk of algal blooms.

    This includes better management of fertiliser on farms and in home gardens. Lower levels of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous will reduce the risk of future blooms in marine and inland waterways.

    When it comes to blue-green algae, flushing with freshwater and stirring it up can disperse the colonies and prevent a bloom.

    Monitoring is also important. OzFish encourages South Australians to continue providing photo reports via iNaturalist. Any new fish kills should also be reported to the state government.

    The harmful algal bloom has transformed the reef at Edithburgh Jetty on the Yorke Peninsula. (Great Southern Reef)

    Microalgae are not all bad

    It’s worth remembering life on Earth wouldn’t exist without microalgae. These tiny organisms produced 60% of the oxygen in the atmosphere today, and play an important role in balanced ecosystems.

    The algae spirulina is a common dietary supplement. Microalgae are also potentially useful for water recycling, as a renewable biofuel and for capturing and storing greenhouse gases.

    Heeding the lessons

    Once a harmful algal bloom begins, it will persist for as long as conditions remain suitable.

    This bloom already has lasted three months, and there’s no guarantee the end is near.

    Recovery will be slow, as shown in the historical record and other parts of the world. And the risk of a repeat event is high.

    Further research is needed to keep these ancient organisms in check.

    With thanks to OzFish SA project manager Brad Martin, who contributed to this article.

    Erin Barrera receives funding from The Hospital Research Foundation, through SA Health.

    – ref. ‘Like an underwater bushfire’: SA’s marine algal bloom is still killing almost everything in its path – https://theconversation.com/like-an-underwater-bushfire-sas-marine-algal-bloom-is-still-killing-almost-everything-in-its-path-257885

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: AI overviews have transformed Google search. Here’s how they work – and how to opt out

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Digital Media, RMIT University

    cosma/Shutterstock

    People turn to the internet to run billions of search queries each year. These range from keeping tabs on world events and celebrities to learning new words and getting DIY help.

    One of the most popular questions Australians recently asked was: “How to inspect a used car?”.

    If you asked Google this at the beginning of 2024, you would have been served a list of individual search results and the order would have depended on several factors. If you asked the same question at the end of the year, the experience would be completely different.

    That’s because Google, which controls about 94% of the Australian search engine market, introduced “AI Overviews” to Australia in October 2024. These AI-generated search result summaries have revolutionised how people search for and find information. They also have significant impacts on the quality of the results.

    How do these AI search summaries work, though? Are they reliable? And is there a way to opt out?

    Synthesising the internet

    Legacy search engines work by evaluating dozens of different criteria and trying to show you the results that they think best match your search terms.

    They take into account the content itself, including how unique, current and comprehensive it is, as well as how it’s structured and organised.

    They also consider relationships between the content and other parts of the web. If trusted sources link to content, that can positively affect its placement in search results.

    They try to infer the searcher’s intent – whether they’re trying to buy something, learn something new, or solve a practical problem. They also consider technical aspects such as how fast the content loads and whether the page is secure.

    All of this adds up to an invisible score each webpage gets that affects its visibility in search results. But AI is changing all this.

    Google is the only search engine that prominently displays AI summaries on its main results page. Bing and DuckDuckGo still use traditional search result layouts, offering AI summaries only through companion apps such as Copilot and Duck.ai.

    Instead of directing users to one specific webpage, generative AI-powered search looks across webpages and sources to try to synthesise what they say. It then tries to summarise the results in a short, conversational and easy-to-understand way.

    In theory, this can result in richer, more comprehensive, and potentially more unique answers. But AI doesn’t always get it right.

    Google is the only search engine that prominently displays AI summaries on its main results page.
    DIA TV/Shutterstock

    How reliable are AI searches?

    Early examples of Google’s AI-powered search from 2024 suggested users eat “at least one small rock per day” – and that they could use non-toxic glue to help cheese stick to pizza.

    One issue is that machines are poorly equipped to detect satire or parody and can use these materials to respond in place of fact-based evidence.

    Research suggests the rate of so-called “hallucinations” – instances of machines making up answers – is getting worse even as the models driving them are getting more sophisticated.

    Machines can’t actually determine what’s true and false. They cannot grasp the nuances of idioms and colloquial language and can only make predictions based on fancy maths. But these predictions don’t always end up being correct, which is an issue – especially for sensitive medical or health questions or when seeking financial advice.

    Rather than just present a summary, Google’s more recent AI overviews have also started including links to sources for key aspects of the answer. This can help users gauge the quality of the overall answer and see where AI might be getting its information from. But evidence suggests sometimes AI search engines cite sources that don’t include the information they claim they do.

    What are the other impacts of AI search?

    AI search summaries are transforming the way information is produced and discovered, reshaping the search engine ecosystem we’ve grown accustomed to over two decades.

    They are changing how information-seekers formulate search queries – moving from keywords or phrases to simple questions, such as those we use in everyday conversation.

    For content providers, AI summaries introduce significant shifts – undermining traditional search engine optimisation techniques, reducing direct traffic to websites, and impacting brand visibility.

    Notably, 43% of AI Overviews link back to Google itself. This reinforces Google’s dominance as a search engine and as a website.

    The forthcoming integration of ads into AI summaries raises concerns about the trustworthiness and independence of the information presented.

    Some internet users are switching search engines entirely and turning to providers that don’t provide AI summaries, such as Bing and DuckDuckGo.
    Casimiro PT/Shutterstock

    Where to from here?

    People should always be mindful of the key limitations of AI summaries.

    Asking for simple facts such as, “What is the height of Uluru?” may yield accurate answers.

    But posing more complex or divisive questions, such as, “Will the 2032 Olympics bankrupt Queensland?”, may require users to open links and delve deeper for a more comprehensive understanding.

    Google doesn’t offer a clear option to turn this feature off entirely. Perhaps the simplest way is to click on the “Web” tab under the search bar on the search results, or to add “-ai” to the search query. But this can get repetitive.

    Some more technical solutions are manually creating a site search filter through Chrome settings. But these require an active act by the user.

    As a result, some developers are offering browser extensions that claim to remove this aspect. Other users are switching search engines entirely and turning to providers that don’t provide AI summaries, such as Bing and DuckDuckGo.

    T.J. Thomson receives funding from the Australian Research Council. He is an affiliate with the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.

    Ashwin Nagappa receives funding fromthe Australian Research Council. He is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow in the QUT node of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.

    Shir Weinbrand receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She is a PhD candidate in the QUT node of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision Making & Society.

    – ref. AI overviews have transformed Google search. Here’s how they work – and how to opt out – https://theconversation.com/ai-overviews-have-transformed-google-search-heres-how-they-work-and-how-to-opt-out-258282

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Khartoum before the war: the public spaces that held the city together

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ibrahim Z. Bahreldin, Associate Professor of Urban & Environmental Design, University of Khartoum

    What makes a public space truly public?

    In Khartoum, before the current conflict engulfed Sudan, the answer was not always a park, a plaza or a promenade.

    The city’s streets, tea stalls (sitat al-shai), protest sites and even burial spaces served as dynamic arenas of everyday life, political expression and informal resilience.

    In a recently published article, I studied 64 public spaces across pre-war Greater Khartoum, revealing a landscape far richer – and more contested – than standard urban classifications suggest. Specifically, I uncovered four classifications: formal, informal, privately owned and hybrid spaces – each alive with negotiation and everyday use.

    While some spaces were planned by colonial engineers or municipal authorities, many were carved out by communities: claimed, adapted and reimagined through use.

    My research offers valuable insights into the design and planning of Africa’s cities. As they grow and face mounting political and environmental pressures, it’s time to rethink how public spaces are defined and designed – not through imported models, but by listening to the ways people already make cities public.



    Read more:
    Sudan needs to accept its cultural diversity: urban planning can help rebuild the country and prevent future conflict

    Across the African continent, cities are growing fast – but not always fairly. Urban expansion often privileges gated developments, mega-projects and high-security zones while neglecting the everyday spaces where most people live, work and gather.

    In Sudan, these dynamics have been further complicated by conflict, displacement and economic instability. The ongoing war has disrupted not only governance, but also the spatial fabric of urban life.

    My paper aims to invite those involved in planning policies and post-conflict reconstruction to move beyond formal, western-centric models that often overlook how publicness actually unfolds in African cities: through informality, negotiation and social improvisation.

    Khartoum’s public spaces, as documented in my study, serve as diagnostic tools for understanding how cities survive crises, express identity and contest inequality.

    In the wake of war and displacement, these spaces will play a role in shaping how Sudan rebuilds not just infrastructure, but social cohesion.

    Pre-war Khartoum

    Khartoum’s public spaces cannot be understood through conventional categories – like formal squares and urban parks – alone. These formal squares represent only one layer of a much more plural and negotiated urban reality.

    Drawing on fieldwork and the documentation of 64 public spaces across Greater Khartoum, I identify four overlapping types that reflect how space is produced, accessed and contested.

    1. Formal public spaces: These include planned parks, ceremonial squares, civic plazas and administrative open spaces, often relics of colonial or postcolonial urban planning. They are defined by order, visibility and regulation. Mīdān Abbas, originally an active civic space in the centre of Khartoum, repeatedly reclaimed by informal traders and protesters, is one example, illustrating how even the most formal spaces can become contested. It was notably active during Sudan’s April 1985 uprising, serving as part of a wider network of civic spaces used for political mobilisation. Informal traders consistently transformed it into a bustling marketplace, embedding everyday commerce and social exchange into the formal urban fabric.

    2. Informal and insurgent spaces: These emerge beyond or against official planning logics – riverbanks used for gatherings, neglected lots transformed into social nodes or bridges appropriated by traders. They include spiritual sites like Sufi tombs, and protest spaces such as the sit-in zone outside the city’s army headquarters. These spaces reveal the city’s capacity for bottom-up urbanism and collective adaptation.

    3. Privately owned civic spaces: Shopping malls, privately managed parks and cultural cafés fall into this category. While they appear public, they are often classed, surveilled (monitored through cameras or security presence) or exclusionary. The rise of these spaces coincides with the decline of state-managed urban infrastructure, reflecting the turn in Sudanese urban governance.



    Read more:
    Sudan: the symbolic significance of the space protesters made their own

    4. Public “private” spaces: These spaces blur lines between ownership and use. They include mosque courtyards, school grounds, building frontages or underutilised university lawns that serve as informal gathering points. Access here is governed less by law and more by social codes, trust or class.

    Together, these typologies highlight that “publicness” in Khartoum is relational. It depends not only on who planned a space, but who uses it, how and under what conditions.

    Planning in African cities must therefore move beyond fixed zoning maps to embrace the layered, fluid and lived nature of urban space.

    Rebuilding, rethinking, resisting

    Post-conflict reconstruction in Sudan – and elsewhere in Africa – must resist the allure of “blank slate” master plans. Those involve rebuilding cities from scratch with sweeping, top-down designs that ignore existing social and spatial dynamics.

    Imported models, often guided by bureaucratic thinking or commercial incentives, risk erasing the very spaces where public life already thrives, albeit informally or invisibly.

    Rather than imposing formality, planners should recognise and strengthen the informal and hybrid systems that sustain civic life, especially in times of instability.

    Urban theorists working in and on the global south, such as AbdouMaliq Simone and the late Vanessa Watson, have long argued for planning frameworks that centre on everyday practices, adaptive use and spatial justice.

    Khartoum offers a compelling case.

    From the sit-ins of 2019 to tea stalls run by displaced women, public spaces in Sudan are not inert backdrops. They are active platforms of everyday life, resistance, care and community-making.

    Reconstruction must begin by asking: what spaces mattered to people before the war? Which ones fostered inclusion, dignity and visibility? Only then can new urban futures emerge, ones that are rooted in the practices of those who have always made the city public, even when the state did not.

    What makes spaces truly public?

    The public realm in Sudan has always been shaped through negotiation, sometimes with the state, often despite it.

    Rebuilding after war is not only about reconstructing buildings but also about reimagining the terms of belonging.

    This requires a shift from viewing public space as a fixed asset to understanding it as a dynamic process. Who gets to gather, to speak, to rest, to protest – these are the true measures of publicness.

    Understanding Khartoum’s pre-war public spaces isn’t a nostalgic exercise. It’s a necessary step towards building more inclusive, resilient and locally grounded cities in the wake of crisis.

    Ibrahim Bahreldin is a member of the Sudanese Institute of Architects and the City Planning Institute of Japan, and is registered as a professional architect and urban planner with the Sudanese Engineering Council and the Saudi Council of Engineers. He is also affiliated with the King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia.

    The Author receives funding from KAU Endowment (WAQF) at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

    – ref. Khartoum before the war: the public spaces that held the city together – https://theconversation.com/khartoum-before-the-war-the-public-spaces-that-held-the-city-together-258632

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: 6 ways AI can partner with us in creative inquiry, inspired by media theorist Marshall McLuhan

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Gordon A. Gow, Director, Media & Technology Studies, University of Alberta

    Crucially, McLuhan argued that far from making the liberal arts obsolete, automation makes them mandatory. (Bernard Gotfryd/Wikimedia Commons)

    Today’s large language models (LLMs) process information across disciplines at unprecedented speed and are challenging higher education to rethink teaching, learning and disciplinary structures.

    As AI tools disrupt conventional subject boundaries, educators face a dilemma: some seek to ban these tools, while others are seeking ways to embrace them in the classroom.

    Both approaches risk missing a deeper transformation that was predicted 60 years ago by Canadian communication theorist Marshall McLuhan.

    McLuhan’s insights can help educators — and all of us grappling with the meaning, uses and misuses of AI — to think about how to cultivate a new mindset, one that integrates human agency and machine capabilities consciously and critically.

    ‘Oracle of the electric age’

    In the mid-1960s, McLuhan published Understanding Media, earning a reputation as the “oracle of the electric age.”

    In the chapter, “Automation: Learning a Living,” McLuhan opens with a provocative observation: “Little Red Schoolhouse Dies When Good Road Built.” Technological change, he suggested, doesn’t merely augment existing systems — it transforms them.

    While roads once expanded access to specialized education, automation reverses this logic, he argued.

    This is because disciplinary boundaries are dissolved, and the intersection of learning and work is redefined. He wrote:

    “Automation … not only ends jobs in the world of work, it ends subjects in the world of learning.”

    McLuhan foresaw that computing would enable new forms of pattern recognition, requiring fundamentally different ways of thinking — more integrative, relational and responsive — rather than simply accelerating old methods.

    Automation makes the arts mandatory

    Crucially, McLuhan argued that far from making the liberal arts obsolete, automation makes them mandatory. In an age where machine intelligence is integrated into communication and creativity, the humanities, with their focus on cultural understanding, ethical reasoning and imaginative expression, become more essential than ever.

    To navigate this landscape, we can borrow from complex systems researcher Stuart Kauffman’s concept of the “adjacent possible,” as developed in author and innovation expert Steven Johnson’s theory of innovation.

    The “adjacent possible” refers to the set of opportunities and innovations that become accessible when new combinations of existing ideas and technologies are explored.

    This gives rise to what I refer to as AI-adjacency: a framework that treats artificial intelligence not as a replacement for human intelligence, but as a partner in strategic collaboration and creative inquiry.

    6 ways AI can be a partner in creative inquiry

    1. Critical discernment

    AI-adjacent learning begins with critical discernment: the ability to assess intellectual and cultural value regardless of whether AI was involved in the creation process.

    When game designer Jason Allen’s AI-assisted image, Théâtre D’opéra Spatial, won first place in a digital arts competition at the 2022 Colorado State Fair — and Allen shared information about it on social media — controversy ensued.

    Commenters were unsure how to evaluate artistic merit when creative direction is shared with AI. Allen reportedly spent more than 80 hours crafting over 600 text prompts in Midjourney, and also digitally altered the work. The debate illustrates how critical discernment moves beyond detecting AI use to asking deeper questions about authorship, effort and esthetic judgment.

    2. Strategic collaboration

    Strategic collaboration requires nuanced decision-making about when and how to involve AI tools in a creative process. A recent study reports that “the impact of ChatGPT as a feedback tool on students’ writing skills was positive and significant.”

    As one student in the study noted: “When you use ChatGPT in a classroom with your classroom, you’re doing it with several people. So much talk going on simultaneously! It’s kinda cool. The conversations are so meaningful and without noticing, we are working together and writing.”

    The value here is in an AI-facilitated collaboration that encourages students to become more interested in learning how to express themselves through writing.

    3. Voice and vision stewardship

    Stewarding voice and vision means ensuring that technology serves individual expression, not the other way around. At Berklee College of Music in Boston, with varied instructors, students are encouraged to explore AI’s varied potential uses in enhancing their creative process. If it’s used, instructors emphasize outputs must reflect the artist’s own style, not just the algorithm’s fluency. This fosters self-awareness and creative authorship amid technological collaboration.

    4. Cultural and social responsibility

    AI tools are not neutral, but they can be powerful allies when developed with cultural and social responsibility. Researchers on Vancouver Island are developing AI voice-to-text technology specifically for Kwak’wala, an endangered Indigenous language.



    Read more:
    How AI could help safeguard Indigenous languages

    Sara Child, a Kwagu’ł band member and professor in Indigenous education leading the project, told CBC that by “building the technology tool, the speech recognition tool, we can tap into that amazing resource that will help us recapture and reclaim language that is trapped in archives.”

    Unlike existing systems designed for English, this AI must be built from scratch because Kwak’wala is verb-centred rather than noun-based.

    The project demonstrates how AI can amplify marginalized voices. In this case, Indigenous communities control the development process and cultural knowledge remains in community hands.

    5. Adaptive expertise

    Adaptive expertise means knowing when to innovate beyond routine solutions. Medical education researchers Brian J. Hess and colleagues define it as “the capacity to apply not only routinized procedural approaches but also know when the situation calls for creative innovative solutions.”

    In an AI-integrated world, students must distinguish between when AI-generated responses are appropriate and can enhance productivity, versus when situations require human, slower, in-depth thinking and creative analysis.



    Read more:
    For both artists and scientists, slow looking allows surprising connections to surface

    Students must distinguish between when AI-generated responses can enhance productivity, versus when situations require human thinking.
    (Allison Shelley for EDUimages), CC BY-NC

    For example, history students can use AI to quickly process archival materials and identify patterns, but must also learn how to use AI to help them interpret the cultural significance of those patterns, which requires innovative analytical approaches grounded in a liberal arts education.

    6. Creative and intellectual agency

    Creative and intellectual agency represents a central pillar of humanities education, rooted in the German concept of Bildung, which is developing oneself through critical engagement with complex ideas.

    This principle of cultivating independent thinking and deep attention to challenging problems remains essential in an AI-integrated world. The challenge facing higher education is find ways to amplify intellectual agency through creative collaboration with AI tools. At Lehigh University in Pennsylvania,
    humanities students work with computer scientists to develop interdisciplinary courses like “Algorithms and Social Justice,” which involves applying humanistic perspectives throughout data analysis processes.

    McLuhan’s warning: loss of self-awareness

    ‘Narcissus,’ by Italian baroque painter Caravaggio, circa 1597–99.
    (Wikimedia Commons)

    McLuhan also offered a powerful warning through the myth of Narcissus in Understanding Media.

    Contrary to popular view, McLuhan argued Narcissus didn’t fall in love with himself; instead, he mistook his reflection for someone else.

    This “extension of himself by mirror,” McLuhan writes, “numbed his perceptions until he became the servomechanism of his own extended … image” — meaning, Narcissus became dependent on his own reflection.

    The real danger of AI isn’t replacement. It’s the loss of self-awareness. We risk becoming passive users of our own technological extensions and allowing them to shape how we think, create and learn without realizing it. In McLuhan’s terms, we become tools of our tools.

    AI-adjacent practices offer a way out. By engaging consciously with technology through the six dimensions, students learn to use AI critically and creatively — without surrendering their agency.

    Gordon A. Gow receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

    – ref. 6 ways AI can partner with us in creative inquiry, inspired by media theorist Marshall McLuhan – https://theconversation.com/6-ways-ai-can-partner-with-us-in-creative-inquiry-inspired-by-media-theorist-marshall-mcluhan-258238

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Senator Tammy Tyrrell on wild days in Tasmania

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

    Tasmanian politics has been thrown into chaos after a Labor motion of no confidence forced Premier Jeremy Rockliff to either resign or call for a new election. The premier opted for the latter, with Tasmanians to vote on July 19, only something over a year into the four-year term.

    In Tasmania, Australia’s smallest state in terms of both size and population, local issues dominate. Labor homed in on economic mismanagement.

    But there is controversy over the Macquarie Point Hobart AFL stadium (which the major parties support) as well as the state’s important salmon industry, which saw a lot of attention federally in the lead-up to the last election.

    To talk all things Tasmanian, we’re joined by Independent Tasmanian Senator Tammy Tyrrell. She was elected in 2022 under the banner of the Jacqui Lambie Network a former member of the party but left last year. We talk about the state election, as well as federal issues and the new Senate.

    Tyrrell laments Tasmanians’ being made to vote again so soon,

    I was out and about on the northwest coast of Tasmania all day yesterday and everybody was like, what the heck is going on? They don’t want to go to an election, the people of Tasmania, they want the parliament to actually be grown ups and sort it out amongst themselves.

    The budget in Tasmania is in a shambles and we’re so far in the red that we can’t see any way out of it. But really? There’s no way that the Labor [party] is going to form government unless they form a minority government and no Tasmanian will support a Labor-Greens government again in a hurry. But I really think that the Liberal government should have elevated somebody else from within to be the leader, to be the premier.

    On her former boss Jacqui Lambie whose party has now collapsed, Tyrrell says it’s because of the kind of person she is,

    [In] the federal election, Jacqui focused outside of Tasmania. She focused on expanding the network. And it didn’t work for her because she didn’t campaign enough here in Tasmania.

    It’s a shame that she’s not supporting the candidate that is still sitting with her under the network. […] I think she should have stuck by Andrew Jenner and supported him through this [Tasmanian] election because he has shown loyalty to her and he has stuck it through thick and thin. So I believe he should be able to run back under the banner.

    Jacqui is a strong person and the network had every chance to be a strong network, but Jacqui [is] not really a team player. She’s more of a single athlete because she’s so determined and strong of her opinion and it’s hard to take a group forward when you’ve got such a strong force that does not communicate sideways very well. She is a strong human being and I still believe in Jacqui but it makes it hard for her to have a team.

    On the salmon farming industry, while Tyrrell voices her support, she agrees that environmental concerns do matter,

    I support any industry that puts jobs and money into small rural and regional communities in Tasmania. I agree that they need to be as eco and as green friendly as possible and I know that the salmon industry is doing things to be clean and as green as possible. But I also believe that we need to look after the people who live and work in Tasmania.

    We can’t sacrifice an industry completely just to satisfy the people that don’t like the salmon industry. I will always support the people of Tasmania and encourage industry and business to be as eco-friendly as possible, which is why we’re encouraging as many biofuels and eco-green fuel companies as possible to come to Tasmania, and thrive here.

    On reports that the Nationals approached her to join their party. Tyrell says while she didn’t seriously consider it, she took it as a “compliment”,

    It was a big compliment though. The Nats represent rural and regional Australia beautifully, by speaking their voice and for them to see that I am representing the people of Tasmania in a good light. It was a huge compliment to be approached to join them. But I’d already been in a relationship and I’m quite happy being a single divorcee.

    It’s amazing being an independent, it means that I can say and do what my community wants me to in their voice without having to agree to broad-sweeping politics or legislative ideas that I don’t agree with fundamentally.

    Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: Senator Tammy Tyrrell on wild days in Tasmania – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-senator-tammy-tyrrell-on-wild-days-in-tasmania-258802

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Chris Hedges: The last days of Gaza

    Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. –

    The genocide is almost complete. When it is concluded it will have exposed the moral bankruptcy of Western civilisation, writes Chris Hedges.

    ANALYSIS: By Chris Hedges

    This is the end. The final blood-soaked chapter of the genocide.

    It will be over soon. Weeks. At most.

    Two million people are camped out amongst the rubble or in the open air. Dozens are killed and wounded daily from Israeli shells, missiles, drones, bombs and bullets.

    They lack clean water, medicine and food. They have reached a point of collapse. Sick. Injured. Terrified. Humiliated. Abandoned. Destitute. Starving. Hopeless.

    In the last pages of this horror story, Israel is sadistically baiting starving Palestinians with promises of food, luring them to the narrow and congested nine-mile ribbon of land that borders Egypt. Israel and its cynically named Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), allegedly funded by Israel’s Ministry of Defense and the Mossad, is weaponising starvation.

    It is enticing Palestinians to southern Gaza the way the Nazis enticed starving Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto to board trains to the death camps. The goal is not to feed the Palestinians. No one seriously argues there is enough food or aid hubs. The goal is to cram Palestinians into heavily guarded compounds and deport them.

    What comes next? I long ago stopped trying to predict the future. Fate has a way of surprising us. But there will be a final humanitarian explosion in Gaza’s human slaughterhouse. We see it with the surging crowds of Palestinians fighting to get a food parcel, which has resulted in Israeli and US private contractors shooting dead at least 130 and wounding over seven hundred others in the first eight days of aid distribution.

    We see it with Benjamin Netanyahu’s arming ISIS-linked gangs in Gaza that loot food supplies. Israel, which has eliminated hundreds of employees with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), doctors, journalists, civil servants and police in targeted assassinations, has orchestrated the implosion of civil society.

    I suspect Israel will facilitate a breach in the fence along the Egyptian border. Desperate Palestinians will stampede into the Egyptian Sinai. Maybe it will end some other way. But it will end soon. There is not much more Palestinians can take.

    We — full participants in this genocide — will have achieved our demented goal of emptying Gaza and expanding Greater Israel. We will bring down the curtain on the live-streamed genocide. We will have mocked the ubiquitous university programmes of Holocaust studies, designed, it turns out, not to equip us to end genocides, but deify Israel as an eternal victim licensed to carry out mass slaughter.

    The mantra of never again is a joke. The understanding that when we have the capacity to halt genocide and we do not, we are culpable, does not apply to us. Genocide is public policy. Endorsed and sustained by our two ruling parties.

    There is nothing left to say. Maybe that is the point. To render us speechless. Who does not feel paralyzed? And maybe, that too, is the point. To paralyse us. Who is not traumatised? And maybe that too was planned. Nothing we do, it seems, can halt the killing. We feel defenceless. We feel helpless. Genocide as spectacle.

    I have stopped looking at the images. The rows of little shrouded bodies. The decapitated men and women. Families burned alive in their tents. The children who have lost limbs or are paralyzed. The chalky death masks of those pulled from under the rubble. The wails of grief. The emaciated faces. I can’t.

    This genocide will haunt us. It will echo down history with the force of a tsunami. It will divide us forever. There is no going back.

    Palestinians under the rubble in 2023 after Israeli airstrike of homes in the Gaza Strip. Image: Ashraf Amra /United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East/ Wikimedia Commons /CC BY-SA 4.0

    And how will we remember? By not remembering.

    Once it is over, all those who supported it, all those who ignored it, all those who did nothing, will rewrite history, including their personal history. It was hard to find anyone who admitted to being a Nazi in post-war Germany, or a member of the Klu Klux Klan once segregation in the southern United States ended.

    A nation of innocents. Victims even. It will be the same. We like to think we would have saved Anne Frank. The truth is different. The truth is, crippled by fear, nearly all of us will only save ourselves, even at the expense of others. But that is a truth that is hard to face. That is the real lesson of the Holocaust. Better it be erased.

    In his book One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, Omar El Akkad writes:

    “Should a drone vaporize some nameless soul on the other side of the planet, who among us wants to make a fuss? What if it turns out they were a terrorist?

    “What if the default accusation proves true, and we by implication be labeled terrorist sympathisers, ostracised, yelled at? It is generally the case that people are most zealously motivated by the worst plausible thing that could happen to them.

    “For some, the worst plausible thing might be the ending of their bloodline in a missile strike. Their entire lives turned to rubble and all of it preemptively justified in the name of fighting terrorists who are terrorists by default on account of having been killed. For others, the worst plausible thing is being yelled at.”

    You can see my interview with El Akkad here.

    You cannot decimate a people, carry out saturation bombing over 20 months to obliterate their homes, villages and cities, massacre tens of thousands of innocent people, set up a siege to ensure mass starvation, drive them from land where they have lived for centuries and not expect blowback.

    The genocide will end. The response to the reign of state terror will begin. If you think it won’t you know nothing about human nature or history. The killing of two Israeli diplomats in Washington and the attack against supporters of Israel at a protest in Boulder, Colorado, are only the start.

    Chaim Engel, who took part in the uprising at the Nazis’ Sobibor death camp in Poland, described how, armed with a knife, he attacked a guard in the camp.

    “It’s not a decision,” Engel explained years later. “You just react, instinctively you react to that, and I figured, ‘Let us to do, and go and do it.’ And I went.

    “I went with the man in the office and we killed this German. With every jab, I said, ‘That is for my father, for my mother, for all these people, all the Jews you killed.’”

    The Sobibor extermination camp gate in the spring of 1943. The pine branches, braided into the fence to make it difficult to see in from the outside. Image: Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain

    Does anyone expect Palestinians to act differently? How are they to react when Europe and the United States, who hold themselves up as the vanguards of civilisation, backed a genocide that butchered their parents, their children, their communities, occupied their land and blasted their cities and homes into rubble? How can they not hate those who did this to them?

    What message has this genocide imparted not only to Palestinians, but to all in the Global South?

    It is unequivocal. You do not matter. Humanitarian law does not apply to you. We do not care about your suffering, the murder of your children. You are vermin. You are worthless. You deserve to be killed, starved and dispossessed. You should be erased from the face of the earth.

    “To preserve the values of the civilised world, it is necessary to set fire to a library,” El Akkad writes:

    “To blow up a mosque. To incinerate olive trees. To dress up in the lingerie of women who fled and then take pictures.

    “To level universities. To loot jewelry, art, food. Banks. To arrest children for picking vegetables. To shoot children for throwing stones.

    “To parade the captured in their underwear. To break a man’s teeth and shove a toilet brush in his mouth. To let combat dogs loose on a man with Down syndrome and then leave him to die.
    “Otherwise, the uncivilised world might win.”

    There are people I have known for years who I will never speak to again. They know what is happening. Who does not know? They will not risk alienating their colleagues, being smeared as an antisemite, jeopardising their status, being reprimanded or losing their jobs.

    They do not risk death, the way Palestinians do. They risk tarnishing the pathetic monuments of status and wealth they spent their lives constructing. Idols.

    They bow down before these idols. They worship these idols. They are enslaved by them.

    At the feet of these idols lie tens of thousands of murdered Palestinians.

    Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News, The Christian Science Monitor and NPR.  He is the host of show The Chris Hedges Report. This article was first published in Scheerpost.

    This article was first published on Café Pacific.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Federal R&D funding boosts productivity for the whole economy − making big cuts to such government spending unwise

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Andrew Fieldhouse, Visiting Assistant Professor of Finance, Texas A&M University

    Research can make everyone better off.
     Emilija Manevska/Moment via Getty Images

    Large cuts to government-funded research and development can endanger American innovation – and the vital productivity gains it supports.

    The Trump administration has already canceled at least US$1.8 billion in research grants previously awarded by the National Institutes of Health, which supports biomedical and health research. Its preliminary budget request for the 2026 fiscal year proposed slashing federal funding for scientific and health research, cutting the NIH budget by another $18 billion – nearly a 40% reduction. The National Science Foundation, which funds much of the basic scientific research conducted at universities, would see its budget slashed by $5 billion – cutting it by more than half.

    Research and development spending might strike you as an unnecessary expense for the government. Perhaps you see it as something universities or private companies should instead be paying for themselves. But as research I’ve conducted shows, if the government were to abandon its long-standing practice of investing in R&D, it would significantly slow the pace of U.S. innovation and economic growth.

    I’m an economist at Texas A&M University. For the past five years, I’ve been studying the long-term economic benefits of government-funded R&D with Karel Mertens, an economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. We have found that government R&D spending on everything from the Apollo space program to the Human Genome Project has fueled innovation. We also found that federal R&D spending has played a significant role in boosting U.S. productivity and spurring economic growth over the past 75 years.

    Measuring productivity

    Productivity rises when economic growth is caused by technological progress and know-how, rather than workers putting in more hours or employers using more equipment and machinery. Economists believe that higher productivity fuels economic growth and raises living standards over the long run.

    U.S. productivity growth fell by half, from an average of roughly 2% a year in the 1950s and 1960s to about 1%, starting in the early 1970s. This deceleration eerily coincides with a big decline in government R&D spending, which peaked at over 1.8% of gross domestic product in the mid-1960s. Government R&D spending has declined since then and has fallen by half – to below 0.9% of GDP – today.

    Government R&D spending encompasses all innovative work the government directly pays for, regardless of who does it. Private companies and universities conduct a lot of this work, as do national labs and federal agencies, like the NIH.

    Correlation is not causation. But in a Dallas Fed working paper released in November 2024, my co-author and I identified a strong causal link between government R&D spending and U.S. productivity growth. We estimated that government R&D spending consistently accounted for more than 20% of all U.S. productivity growth since World War II. And a decline in that spending after the 1960s can account for nearly one-fourth of the deceleration in productivity since then.

    These significant productivity gains came from R&D investments by federal agencies that are not focused on national defense. Examples include the NIH’s support for biomedical research, the Department of Energy’s funding for physics and energy research, and NASA’s spending on aeronautics and space exploration technologies.

    Not all productivity growth is driven by government R&D. Economists think public investment in physical infrastructure, such as construction of the interstate highway system starting in the Eisenhower administration, also spurred productivity growth. And U.S. productivity growth briefly accelerated during the information technology boom of the late 1990s and early 2000s, which we do not attribute to government R&D investment.

    More R than D

    We have found that government R&D investment is more effective than private R&D spending at driving productivity, likely because the private sector tends to spend much more on the development side of R&D, while the public sector tends to emphasize research.

    Economists believe the private sector will naturally underinvest in more fundamental research because it is harder to patent and profit from this work. We think our higher estimated returns on nondefense R&D reflect greater productivity benefits from fundamental research, which generates more widely shared knowledge, than from private sector spending on development.

    Like the private sector, the Department of Defense spends much more on development – of weapons and military technology – than on fundamental research. We found only inconclusive evidence on the returns on military R&D.

    R&D work funded by the Defense Department also tends to initially be classified and kept secret from geopolitical rivals, such as the Manhattan Project that developed the atomic bomb. As a result, gains for the whole economy from that source of innovation could take longer to materialize than the 15-year time frame we have studied.

    Research takes not just time but money, and the government is now cutting that funding.
    Nitat Termmee/Moment via Getty Images

    Role of Congress

    The high returns on nondefense R&D that we estimated suggest that Congress has historically underinvested in these areas. For instance, the productivity gains from nondefense R&D are at least 10 times higher than those from government investments in highways, bridges and other kinds of physical infrastructure. The government has also invested far more in physical infrastructure than R&D over the past 75 years. Increasing R&D investment would take advantage of these higher returns and gradually reduce them because of diminishing marginal returns to additional investment.

    So why is the government not spending substantially more on R&D?

    One argument sometimes heard against federal R&D spending is that it displaces, or “crowds out,” R&D spending the private sector would otherwise undertake. For instance, the administration’s budget request proposed reducing or eliminating NASA space technology programs it deemed “better suited to private sector research and development.”

    But my colleague and I have found that government spending on R&D complements private investment. An additional dollar of government nondefense R&D spending causes the private sector to increase its R&D spending by an additional 20 cents. So we expect budget cuts to the NIH, NSF and NASA to actually reduce R&D spending by companies, which is also bad for economic growth.

    Federal R&D spending is also often on the chopping block whenever Congress focuses on deficit reduction. In part, that likely reflects the gradual nature of the economic benefits from government-funded R&D, which are at odds with the country’s four-year electoral cycles.

    Similarly, the benefits from NIH spending on biomedical research are usually less visible than government spending on Medicare or Medicaid, which are health insurance programs for those 65 years and older and those with low incomes or disabilities. But Medicare or Medicaid help Americans buy prescription drugs and medical devices that were invented with the help of NIH-funded research.

    Even if the benefits of government R&D are slow to materialize or are harder to see than those from other government programs, our research suggests that the U.S. economy will be less innovative and productive – and Americans will be worse off for it – if Congress agrees to deep cuts to science and research funding.

    The views expressed in the Dallas Fed working paper are the views of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas or the Federal Reserve System.

    Andrew Fieldhouse does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Federal R&D funding boosts productivity for the whole economy − making big cuts to such government spending unwise – https://theconversation.com/federal-randd-funding-boosts-productivity-for-the-whole-economy-making-big-cuts-to-such-government-spending-unwise-255823

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: The complex reality of college student mental health: Data reveals both challenges and positive trends

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Jeffrey A. Hayes, Professor of Education and Psychology, Penn State

    College students are facing mental health challenges, but not all is lost. Bevan Goldswain/Getty Images

    The word “crisis” is used frequently and, I would argue, inaccurately, to depict the psychological well-being of today’s college students.

    It is true that college students’ mental health has deteriorated in many regards during the past two decades.

    The Healthy Minds Study, which gathers national survey data on tens of thousands of students annually, has found that the percentage who considered suicide in the prior year rose from 6% in 2007 to 13% in 2024. The percentage of students who made a specific suicide plan tripled during that period.

    While some news reports portray the current state of student mental health as an unprecedented crisis, the full picture is more nuanced. As a psychologist who has been researching college student mental health for more than 20 years, as summarized in my recent book, “College Student Mental Health and Wellness: Coping on Campus,” I believe recent data suggests a turning of the tide.

    The 2024 Health Minds Study found a slight decrease over the previous two years in the percentage of students contemplating suicide.

    Data also reveals a similar decline in the percentage of students dealing with severe anxiety from 2022 to 2024.

    The study marks the first time since data collection began on suicide or severe anxiety that there has been a two-year decrease in either area.

    Reason for concern

    The demand for psychological services at college and university counseling centers has outpaced growth in undergraduate enrollment.
    Peter Dazeley/Getty Images

    To be clear, there is reason for concern about the psychological well-being of college students.

    Healthy Minds Study researchers found that in 2007, 9% of college students were taking psychotropic medication such as antidepressants. In 2024, that number had grown to 26%.

    A 2024 national survey conducted by the American College Health Association found that more than a third of students received mental health care in the previous year.

    The demand for psychological services at college and university counseling centers has outpaced growth in undergraduate enrollment more than fourfold.

    From 2013 to 2021, suicidal thoughts, depression and anxiety worsened, particularly among Native American and Alaskan Native students and other students of color.

    During that same time, there was a 13% increase in students who were at risk for developing an eating disorder.

    Findings from another national dataset gathered by the Center for Collegiate Mental Health, an international network of more than 800 college and university counseling centers, indicate that from 2010 to 2024, depression symptoms increased 18% among students receiving psychological services, general anxiety symptoms rose more than 25%, and social anxiety symptoms climbed more than 30%.

    In addition, students’ family-related distress steadily increased during the past decade.

    The sky is not falling

    Despite disturbing trends in student mental health, recent data suggests that fewer students are contemplating suicide and dealing with anxiety.
    Ariel Skelley/Getty Images

    Despite these challenges, there is good news regarding decreases in the share of students considering self-injury and reporting depression symptoms.

    Data from the Healthy Minds Study reveals that the percentage of students considering self-injury has not increased the past two years, after more than doubling from 14% in 2007 to 29% in 2022.

    A similar pattern can be found in Center for Collegiate Mental Health data about depression. Depression symptoms have decreased each of the past two academic years.

    The network has been collecting depression data since 2010, and never before have scores dropped in consecutive years.

    Other researchers have noted a similar recent decrease in depression among college students.

    The Center for Collegiate Mental Health data also indicates that students’ academic distress peaked following the onset of COVID-19 and declined each of the past three years, returning to pre-pandemic levels. Students’ frustration has also shown a gradual, 7% decline from 2010 to 2024.

    Furthermore, for the first time since 2012, there has been a two-year uptick in college students who are flourishing, according to data from the Healthy Minds Study. Other researchers have found a similar recent trend, accompanied by a decrease in student loneliness.

    More good news, based on data, about what students put in their bodies: Symptoms related to eating disorders have not increased in any of the past four years, according to the Center for Collegiate Mental Health. Data from the network indicates that current alcohol use is at its lowest level since 2010, declining 29% over that period.

    Binge drinking has also decreased 18% since 2012, according to the Healthy Minds Study.

    We need data, not dread

    Mental health professionals need accurate data to support the psychological well-being of college students.
    SeventyFour/Getty Images

    Valid data can help in discerning the truth about college student mental health.

    Data that captures national trends in college student psychological well-being is needed to support mental health professionals. For example, as data reveals emerging trends, such as an increase in college students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, training can be provided to clinicians in treating students with these concerns.

    Campus mental health professionals and administrators can also use data to advocate for resources they need to support students. For instance, our research has found that students of color are more likely to seek psychological help when there are therapists on staff from the same ethnic or racial background. This data can inform hiring practices at college and university counseling centers.

    Finally, continuous data collection can help determine how college student mental health is impacted by specific events, such as pandemics, campus shootings and laws that eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs. During the COVID-19 pandemic, social anxiety decreased, while general anxiety spiked.

    These events may not affect students equally.

    International students, a group that already experiences heightened suicidal thoughts, may be particularly impacted by recent news of visa cancellations and deportations.

    Jeffrey A. Hayes has received a research grant from the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention to study college student suicide.

    – ref. The complex reality of college student mental health: Data reveals both challenges and positive trends – https://theconversation.com/the-complex-reality-of-college-student-mental-health-data-reveals-both-challenges-and-positive-trends-257086

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Energy Star, on the Trump administration’s target list, has a long history of helping consumers’ wallets and the planet

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Magali A. Delmas, Professor of Management, Institute of the Environment and Sustainability, Anderson School of Management, University of California, Los Angeles

    The blue Energy Star label is widely recognized across the U.S. Alex Tai/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

    Since the early 1990s, the small blue Energy Star label has appeared on millions of household appliances, electronics and even buildings across the United States. But as the Trump administration considers terminating some or all of the program, it is worth a look at what exactly this government-backed label means, and why it has become one of the most recognizable environmental certifications in the country.

    Energy Star was launched by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1992 and later expanded in partnership with the Department of Energy with a simple goal: making it easier for consumers and businesses to choose energy-efficient products, helping them reduce energy use and save money, without sacrificing quality or performance.

    As a scholar of energy conservation, I have studied the Energy Star program’s development and public impact, including how it has shaped consumer behavior and environmental outcomes.

    According to the EPA, it has saved consumers an average of US$15 billion a year on energy costs since its inception, a massive return on a program that costs taxpayers an estimated $32 million a year.

    How Energy Star works

    When you see an Energy Star label on a product, it means that product has met strict energy efficiency standards set by the EPA in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Energy, which tests how much energy appliances use. The federal agencies also consult with product manufacturers, utilities and others to figure out how best to improve products and determine how cost-effective changes might be.

    Products that earn the Energy Star certification typically use significantly less energy than standard models, often between 10% and 50% less. The energy – and financial – savings can add up quickly, especially when homes or buildings have multiple Energy Star appliances and systems.

    Energy Star itself does not manufacture or sell products. Instead, it acts as a trusted third-party certifier, providing consumers and businesses with reliable information and clear labeling. It also offers information to help people estimate energy savings and compare long-term costs, making it easier to identify high-performing, cost-effective options. Manufacturers participating in Energy Star seek to improve their environmental reputation and increase their market share, giving them a strong incentive to meet the program’s efficiency criteria.

    Today, the label appears on refrigerators, dishwashers, laptops, commercial buildings and even newly built homes. The government says people in more than 90% of American households recognize the label.

    Energy Star-certified appliances include upright freezers, clothes washers and many other types of home equipment, which use between 10% and 50% less energy than uncertified items.
    AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel

    People don’t always choose efficient products

    Energy Star seeks to tackle a wide range of problems that can result in people deciding not to buy energy-efficient products.

    One problem is that efficient models often come with higher up-front costs. While efficient models save money over time, that higher purchase price can discourage buyers. Energy Star helps counter this problem by clearly showing how much money can be saved on energy costs over the lifetime of the product – as compared with noncertified products – and by offering rebates that reduce the initial expense.

    Another problem involves what economists call “split incentives.” A landlord might not want to pay a higher price up front for energy-efficient appliances if the tenants are the ones who will save money on the utility bills. And renters may not want to spend a lot of money on appliances or equipment in a place they do not own. Energy Star tries to bridge this divide by promoting whole-building certifications, which encourage landlords to invest in their buildings’ energy efficiency with the goal of making their properties more attractive to tenants.

    The countless varieties of refrigerators, dishwashers, air conditioners and other items on the market can also create confusion. Consumers who just look at manufacturers’ promotional material may find it very hard to determine which appliances truly deliver better energy efficiency. The Energy Star label makes this comparison easier: If the label is there, it is among the most efficient choices available.

    And consumers are often skeptical of manufacturers’ claims – especially when it comes to new technologies or environmental promises. Energy Star’s status as a program backed by the government, rather than a private company, gives it a level of independence and credibility that many other labels lack. People know the certification is based on science, not sales tactics.

    Lastly, Energy Star helps overcome the problem that many people are not aware of how much energy their appliances consume, or how those choices contribute to climate change. By connecting everyday products to larger environmental outcomes, Energy Star helps consumers understand the effects of their decisions, without needing to become energy experts.

    The program delivers real results

    Since its inception, more than 800,000 appliance models have earned Energy Star certification based on the criteria for their type of product.

    The same principles that make the label valuable for consumer appliances – independent certification, clear metrics and a focus on results – have proved equally effective in real estate. Nearly 45,000 commercial buildings and industrial plants have earned certification. And there have been more than 2.5 million Energy Star-certified homes and apartments built in the U.S.

    In 2023 alone, over 190,000 new homes and apartments were certified, representing more than 12% of all new residential construction nationwide.

    Energy Star-certified homes are designed to be at least 10% more energy efficient than those built to standard building codes, with more insulation and windows and lights that are energy-efficient, as well as appliances. These enhancements can translate to better quality, comfort and long-term cost savings for homeowners.

    Commercial buildings, which account for about 18% of total U.S. energy use, have also benefited substantially. Research I was involved in found that certified commercial buildings use an average of 19% less energy than their noncertified counterparts.

    Computers can sleep, too – not just cats. Both types conserve energy.
    Markus Scholz/picture alliance via Getty Images

    Why government leadership matters

    Energy Star’s status as a government-led label contributes to its credibility as a more neutral and science-based source of information than commercial labels.

    Energy Star’s government connections also bring scale: By requiring federal purchases to have Energy Star certifications, the federal government can influence manufacturers. For example, a federal executive order in 1993 required government agencies to purchase only computers that had been Energy Star-certified, which required them to have energy-saving sleep functions.

    In response, manufacturers began including the feature so they could sell their products to the government. Consumers soon came to expect the sleep feature on all computers.

    A quiet success story in energy and climate

    Energy Star does not grab headlines. It does not rely on regulation or mandates. Yet it has quietly become one of the most effective tools the U.S. has for improving energy efficiency across homes, offices and public buildings.

    That said, the program is not without its limitations. Some critics have pointed out that not all certified products consistently perform at the highest efficiency levels. Other critics note that the benefits of Energy Star are more accessible to wealthier consumers who can afford up-front investments, even with available rebates. And the EPA itself has, at times, struggled to manage the certification process and update standards in line with the latest technological advances.

    At a time when energy costs and climate concerns are rising, Energy Star stands out as a rare example of a practical, nonpartisan program that delivers real benefits. It helps individuals, businesses and communities save money, lower emissions and take part in a more sustainable future – one smart decision at a time.

    Magali Delmas received funding from the US EPA in 2002 for research on Environmental Management Strategies and Corporate Performance.

    – ref. Energy Star, on the Trump administration’s target list, has a long history of helping consumers’ wallets and the planet – https://theconversation.com/energy-star-on-the-trump-administrations-target-list-has-a-long-history-of-helping-consumers-wallets-and-the-planet-258152

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Video games teach students in this class how religion works in the modern world

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Michael Naparstek, Associate Teaching Professor Religious Studies, University of Tennessee

    A man plays the Chinese action role-playing game ‘Black Myth: Wukong’ during its launch day in Hangzhou, in eastern China’s Zhejiang province, on Aug. 20, 2024. STR/AFP via Getty Images

    Uncommon Courses is an occasional series from The Conversation U.S. highlighting unconventional approaches to teaching.

    Title of the course

    Religion and Gameworlds

    What prompted the idea for the course?

    Most of my research is in Chinese religions, and I find it fascinating that popular video games – like many popular films before them – draw from the mythologies, cosmologies, unseen powers and heroic narratives found across the world’s religious traditions.

    Recent examples such as “Black Myth: Wukong” and “Raji: an Ancient Epic” draw explicitly from mythologies and religious narratives of China and India, respectively, putting the player in direct contest against pantheons of gods. Meanwhile, games such as “Sid Meier’s CIV VI,” where players develop an historical civilization from the Stone Age to Space Age in a quest for global domination, explicitly utilize religion as ways to develop and conquer the world.

    At the same time, the interactive experience of a video game makes it an especially interesting place to study religion. When your character uses magic, interacts with powerful deities, or even achieves godlike status themselves, the player also shares such experiences on some level as well. Sometimes, viewers’ experiences blur the lines between “real life” and on-screen.

    Some churches have even used the game “Second Life” to offer worshippers the option of getting baptized using their digital avatar in the game. This kind of practice raises poignant questions about how we understand religion in our modern world.

    A still from the ‘Second Life’ game.
    Strawberry/Flickr, CC BY-NC-SA

    What does the course explore?

    What makes this course different from many others that utilize video games is that the student experience of playing the games influences how we frame our investigation of religion. Students wrestle with questions about how religion helps build the worlds they are experiencing.

    We meet in the game lab as a class once a week to observe and analyze each other’s experiences playing different kinds of games.

    We start the week with relevant theoretical and historical framing in the traditional classroom. For example, in our investigation of “Black Myth: Wukong,” a game inspired by the 16th-century novel “Journey to the West,” students first read selections from the work as they learn about its protagonist, the trickster monkey god Sun Wukong.

    In the novel, Wukong picks fights with all the gods in an attempt to overthrow the cosmic order, only to eventually be violently put in his place by the highest gods of the Chinese pantheon. Our class discussions thus serve as a general introduction to Chinese religions, while we also get to discuss the theoretical basis for culturally defined ideas such as what makes a hero.

    Playing as a descendant of Sun Wukong, students explore enchanted landscapes, interact with local spirits and engage in magical combat against the very gods that we learned about in class.

    Each week, students note their observations, carefully detailing their experience playing the game, as well as the experience of watching others do the same. Students are also asked to analyze the ways in which religious themes, narratives and practices played a role in the game world they experienced.

    We conclude the class with weekly reflections on the overall experience.

    What will the course prepare students to do?

    In 2024, the video game industry boasted over US$184 billion generated in market value. The global reach of games allows new audiences to experience and learn about religious narratives and practices in new ways.

    Popular media has long been a powerful mode of cultural exchange. Video games are just a recent example, but the scale to which gamers around the world connect with each other through playing demands more attention.

    The wild popularity following the 2024 release of the game “Black Myth: Wukong,” the first premier produced game out of China for an international audience, suggests that this kind of experience is truly a global phenomenon that will only continue to grow. It only makes sense that video games can serve as powerful pedagogical tools as well.

    The goal of the course is to prepare students to better understand the broader contexts in which their shared experience of enjoying video games derives. Learning about the role of religion in shaping that experience allows students to better understand how religion shapes our modern world.

    Michael Naparstek does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Video games teach students in this class how religion works in the modern world – https://theconversation.com/video-games-teach-students-in-this-class-how-religion-works-in-the-modern-world-257511

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Adolescents who smoke or vape may believe tobacco’s perceived coping benefits outweigh accepted health risks

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Adriana Espinosa, Associate Professor of Psychology, City College of New York

    Many parents are unaware of their adolescents’ tobacco use. Naveen Asaithambi/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    Tobacco use in a variety of forms is common in adolescent life today, with over 2.25 million youth using.

    Huge progress has been made over the past few decades in reducing cigarette use among young people. But tobacco use – primarily through e-cigarettes, also known as vapes – remains a complex problem for public health and policy.

    In 2024, just over 8% of U.S. middle and high school students reported having used a tobacco product. Among tobacco users, nearly 6% used e-cigarettes, more than a quarter of whom used an e-cigarette product daily.

    We are behavioral health researchers. Our team’s ongoing research examines the factors associated with adolescent tobacco product use in the U.S.

    According to our research, many adolescents who smoke and use vapes are aware of the health risks associated with tobacco use, which demonstrates the effectiveness of public health education campaigns.

    But our research has also found that some adolescents also view tobacco use as helpful in relieving emotional distress. These perceived benefits increase the likelihood of initiating and continuing tobacco use.

    When combined with factors such as easy access to tobacco products or living with someone who uses them, the risk of adolescent use more than doubles, which sets the stage for harmful physical and mental health effects.

    Parental awareness and adolescents’ motivations to use tobacco

    As a mother of a teenager, one of us, Adriana, has experienced this firsthand. For months, my 14-year-old son was vaping in his room, and I had no idea. When he finally told me that he turned to vaping whenever he felt upset, it was like coming face-to-face with the very issues we study.

    This scenario illustrates both the compelling reasons why adolescents may use tobacco and nicotine products and the reality that many parents don’t realize their kids are smoking or vaping.

    Since 2022, our team has been examining the factors associated with tobacco use among more than 8,000 adolescents ages 12 to 17 from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health, or PATH, study – the largest multiyear, nationally representative study of tobacco use in the U.S. We looked at the use of cigarettes, electronic products, traditional or filtered cigars, cigarillos, pipes, hookahs, smokeless or dissolvable tobacco and more.

    We found that emotional distress, along with the belief that tobacco products help manage negative emotions, are significant factors driving adolescent tobacco use.

    This highlights the complexity of the issue – that even when teens recognize the health risks of tobacco use, vaping and other forms of tobacco use may function as a coping strategy, albeit an unhealthy one, for the wide range of emotional challenges that come with adolescence.

    Teachers and school administrators are struggling to control vaping among students because many devices are small, odorless and easy to conceal.
    Peter Dazeley/Photodisc via Getty Images

    Harmful effects of adolescent tobacco use

    Research has shown that adolescents may perceive e-cigarettes as a more appealing and less harmful alternative to traditional cigarettes.

    The availability of flavored options further increases the appeal of these products and can contribute to the progression from occasional to regular use and ultimately the development of nicotine dependence.

    A growing body of research continues to reveal the harmful effects of tobacco use, including vaping, on developing brains and lungs. Exposure to nicotine during adolescence can interfere with brain development, impair attention and learning, and increase the risk of use and dependence on other substances later in life.

    What makes vaping especially difficult to manage is its stealth. Unlike combustible products, many vaping devices are small, odorless and very easy to conceal. As a result, parents, teachers and school administrators are struggling to detect and curb vaping among teens.

    Strategies for addressing why teens use tobacco

    In our view, policy efforts that focus primarily on raising awareness about health risks, restricting access to tobacco products or reducing the appeal of e-cigarettes or vapes will reach only a subset of youth who use them, and not those who may use for emotional reasons.

    And while such bans may limit access to tobacco products in formal settings, the availability of these products from friends and social networks, online platforms or unregulated markets will not likely be reduced solely through that type of health messaging.

    As our findings show, these efforts may miss a stronger, even more enduring driver of youth tobacco use: the pervasive belief that tobacco use helps manage stress, anger and other difficult emotions. Our research highlights that emotional distress and the perception that tobacco use can help them cope with stress are central to why many adolescents begin and continue using these products, even when they are aware of the health risks.

    In this context, simply limiting access to tobacco products or repeating well-known health warnings will do little to address the underlying emotional motivations to use.

    We believe that to make meaningful progress, policy and prevention interventions will need to address the underlying motives for use, and not just focus on the harmful health effects of nicotine or means of access.

    This includes integrating emotional and behavioral health support into tobacco prevention strategies and expanding school-based and community mental health services. And while public health education campaigns such as The Real Cost have been successful in reducing the number of adolescents who begin using e-cigarettes, our findings suggest more emphasis on the emotional drivers of tobacco use is warranted.

    Adriana Espinosa receives funding from the National Institutes of Health (NCI and NIMHD).

    Lesia M. Ruglass receives funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIGMS, NIDA, NCI, and NIMHD).

    – ref. Adolescents who smoke or vape may believe tobacco’s perceived coping benefits outweigh accepted health risks – https://theconversation.com/adolescents-who-smoke-or-vape-may-believe-tobaccos-perceived-coping-benefits-outweigh-accepted-health-risks-254294

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Older adults with dementia misjudge their financial skills – which may make them more vulnerable to fraud, new research finds

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Ian McDonough, Associate Professor of Psychology, Binghamton University, State University of New York

    Older adults generally have a good sense of their own financial abilities – unless they have dementia. shapecharge/E+ via Getty Images

    Older adults diagnosed with dementia lose their ability to assess how well they manage their finances, according to a recent study I co-authored in The Gerontologist. In comparison, people of the same age who don’t have dementia are aware of their financial abilities – and this awareness improves over time.

    For our study, we used data from over 2,000 adults in the U.S. age 65 and older, collected during a long-term study on aging.
    We focused on how participants’ financial skills changed over time. The study began in 1998 and is still running, but we probed data collected between 1998 and 2009.

    Participants were assessed at one year, two years, five years and 10 years for their ability to carry out everyday tasks, including ones that required handling money. For example, they had to calculate the cost of a gym membership and a store discount rate, fill out part of a tax return and assess the cost of medical services. They also rated how well they thought they could do everyday financial tasks. Initially, none of the participants were diagnosed with dementia, but over the course of the decade, 87 participants, or 3.1%, received a dementia diagnosis.

    We found that even though participants’ performance on financial tasks declined as they aged, older adults who did not have dementia and older adults who had mild cognitive impairment were appropriately aware of their financial abilities. What’s more, that awareness increased over time. However, participants who were diagnosed with dementia during the study and experienced severe cognitive decline often misjudged how well they performed financial tasks.

    Financial scams targeting older adults are on the rise.

    The lack of insight into one’s cognitive abilities is called anosognosia. This study reveals a new type called financial anosognosia.

    Why it matters

    As people get older, their financial management skills start to deteriorate. The combination of a lifelong accumulation of wealth, declining financial abilities and a lack of awareness of those declines puts older adults at serious risk for financial scams.

    Few tools are available that can support families in helping cognitively impaired adults manage their finances. Our research suggests that there is a critical window of time after people begin to experience cognitive decline during which they are still aware of their financial abilities. We believe that this is when people can take action to secure their finances and develop systems to protect themselves from fraud.

    What still isn’t known

    Close friends or family members are often tempted to take away the financial autonomy of an older adult who is mismanaging their finances. However, that may not be the best solution, particularly for people who feel that handling their finances is a core part of their identity. More research is needed to identify how best to balance personal autonomy and the need to protect a person’s finances.

    What’s next

    This study used paper-and-pencil tasks to assess financial performance. But increasingly, many older adults are using online banking.

    E-banking simplifies many calculations, which may be helpful for older adults with declining cognition. However, e-banking can also make finances more of a black box, which may decrease a person’s awareness of their financial abilities. Furthermore, e-banking is constantly advancing, putting older adults at a disadvantage because they are more likely to be less cognitively flexible and to learn more slowly.

    We hope to explore whether older adults with and without cognitive decline have similar awareness of their ability to appropriately manage their finances online and identify potential financial scams.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    Ian McDonough receives funding from The National Institutes of Health.

    – ref. Older adults with dementia misjudge their financial skills – which may make them more vulnerable to fraud, new research finds – https://theconversation.com/older-adults-with-dementia-misjudge-their-financial-skills-which-may-make-them-more-vulnerable-to-fraud-new-research-finds-256973

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: How a new bus line in Philadelphia is defying post-pandemic transit trends

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Julene Paul, Assistant Professor of Planning, University of Texas at Arlington

    The 49 bus connects the Strawberry Mansion, Grays Ferry and University City neighborhoods. Courtesy of SEPTA

    When the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority launched the 49 bus route in Philadelphia in early 2019, those who most benefited were older adults and people who already ride the bus – and not commuters who were persuaded to ditch their cars for public transportation, according to our new research.

    Some of the largest benefits of Route 49 came in saved time and fewer transfers for existing users of other transit routes.

    We are a professor of city planning and a professor of statistics and data science who recently published a study on Route 49, SEPTA’s newest local bus service, in the peer-reviewed journal Transportation Research Record.

    Route 49 launched in early 2019 and was the first local bus service that SEPTA added to its system in nearly a decade. It connects two residential Philadelphia neighborhoods – Strawberry Mansion in North Philadelphia and Grays Ferry in South Philadelphia – with the job-rich University City area in West Philadelphia.

    Public transit agencies often try to court “choice” riders – people who have a reasonable chance of choosing to either drive or use public transportation for a given trip, and who tend to be higher income.

    SEPTA, however, didn’t necessarily focus on choice riders with the design of Route 49. But planners at the agency did tell us during our data collection that many commuters to University City don’t take public transit.

    We found that early riders of Route 49 tended to be previous transit riders who seldom drove before the line’s launch. They took other SEPTA buses, or did not make that trip.

    Riders ages 65 and older, who are less likely to be commuters, were even more likely to have simply switched bus routes to make the same trip they regularly made before the new service line began.

    Why it matters

    While ridership on most SEPTA routes has declined in the post-pandemic era, Route 49 is one of the only Philly bus or train lines to see ridership growth. It had the largest post-COVID rebound of any bus line in SEPTA’s network.

    For new bus and rail lines to be financially sustainable, they must attract enough riders. The fares those riders pay allow agencies to run services more regularly and have the line be cost effective.

    While it’s always difficult to attract new riders, the past few years have been especially challenging for U.S. transit agencies. National transit ridership remains only about 80% of what it was when the COVID-19 pandemic began in early 2020.

    Getting people back onto buses and trains will require agencies to understand what attracts people to new transit lines. If public transit agencies want to recapture ridership and echo the success of bus services like Route 49, it may be best for them to talk to current users rather than potential public transit converts.

    How we do our work

    To understand how new riders used Route 49, we boarded Route 49 buses throughout the route and conducted in-person surveys with over 350 riders in early 2019. We wanted to capture feedback and data from users of the service shortly after it was launched.

    In addition to asking riders what they used Route 49 for and how they took the same trip before its launch, we recorded characteristics such as age, income and gender.

    What’s next

    Drawing on our 2019 survey data, we plan to explore how new Route 49 riders learned about the transit line and decided to begin riding the new service. Did they hear about it from agency flyers or websites? From seeing new bus lines on the road, or from friends discussing it? Analyzing these answers can help transit agencies enhance access for all travelers.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    Read more of our stories about Philadelphia.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. How a new bus line in Philadelphia is defying post-pandemic transit trends – https://theconversation.com/how-a-new-bus-line-in-philadelphia-is-defying-post-pandemic-transit-trends-256064

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: From Washington’s burned letters to Trump’s missing transcripts, partial presidential records limit people’s full understanding of history

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Shannon Bow O’Brien, Associate Professor of Instruction, The University of Texas at Austin

    The presidential Resolute Desk at the White House on Feb. 12, 2025. Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

    President Donald Trump’s second term as president will surely go down in history, though of course, just six months into his four-year term, much of this story has yet to be written.

    But it is already clear that most Americans will not be able to read exactly what Trump has said, as they have with previous presidents, during his current term in the White House.

    The White House has removed the official transcripts of Trump’s public remarks from its government website, NBC News reported in May 2025, replacing the written transcripts with select videos and audio of Trump’s public appearances.

    White House officials told NBC News that this switch should help people get a fuller, more consistent and accurate sense of Trump by watching and listening to him, rather than reading what he says verbatim at official events.

    Government stenographers are also still recording and transcribing all of Trump’s remarks, though these are no longer being published on the White House’s website or elsewhere. It is not clear where or how those transcriptions are being saved.

    For years, translators, reporters, students, historians and presidential scholars like me have used official presidential transcripts to understand a president’s exact words and track government decisions. Without these written transcripts, it becomes harder to get the full story of exactly what the president has done or said.

    President Donald Trump, joined by members of his cabinet, delivers a statement on natural disaster preparedness in the Oval Office at the White House on June 10, 2025.
    Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

    A partial history

    A nation’s history is etched in its records. The preservation of official proceedings provides the bedrock for understanding a country’s past and navigating its future.

    A growing chorus of historians, public officials and transparency advocates is raising alarms about how the Trump administration is curating and potentially manipulating the government’s records and actions.

    The White House’s recent decision to not share official, written transcripts of what the president has said is not the first time this issue has emerged under Trump.

    As I wrote in 2021, the first Trump administration did not consistently submit the transcripts of the president’s political rally speeches to the National Archives, as was the custom with previous presidents. The National Archives is an independent government agency within the executive branch that preserves the nation’s historical records.

    This official recordkeeping is important, and it’s more than a tradition – it’s a legal obligation. A law called the Presidential Records Act of 1978 says that everything a president does in office – from making speeches to writing emails – belongs to the public.

    This includes not just formal speeches, but also public remarks and oral exchanges, which are traditionally included in a compilation of presidential documents.

    My examination of this compilation for 2025 appears to show a gap in such records from mid-April 2025 onward. While the transcript of Trump’s full remarks when speaking with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni was published on this government site on April 18, for example, publicly available documents from May only include a checklist of White House press releases, a digest of White House announcements and a list of acts that the president signed into law.

    In the absence of complete official records from government sources, external, independent organizations that also monitor the presidency, like The American Presidency Project at the University of California, Santa Barbara, have become crucial repositories.

    The American Presidency Project diligently logs and, when transcripts are unavailable, provides video of public presidential messaging, striving to create as complete a record as possible for all curious viewers and readers.

    Workers secure scaffolding on the side of the National Archives building in Washington on April 2, 2025.
    Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images

    Washington’s letters up in flames

    The fight over keeping an honest record of presidents is a problem that comes up again and again in American history.

    Perhaps the most powerful example of losing historical records comes from the country’s very first president, George Washington. He knew he was setting an example for all future presidents and kept very careful records. He wanted to leave a complete story of his life and his work for the future.

    But there is very little of it left.

    After Washington died, his wife, Martha, burned most of the letters they wrote to each other to keep their lives private.

    Washington left his official papers to his nephew, Supreme Court Justice Bushrod Washington. But Bushrod gave many of them to Chief Justice John Marshall, who was writing a book about the president. The papers were not treated carefully, and many were damaged. To make matters worse, Bushrod would often tear off scraps of Washington’s writings and give them to people as souvenirs.

    The result is that Americans have an incomplete picture of their first president. What now exists is a weaker version of the real story, created more by what other people did than by what Washington himself had planned.

    Memories fade, and people are not around forever.

    The main way that the U.S. can preserve its story is through accurate records. The current arguments over saving transcripts and official papers are about more than just rules. They are about the future. The records that Trump and other presidents leave behind will decide if people in the future see them as they really were, or just how they wanted others to view them.

    Shannon Bow O’Brien does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. From Washington’s burned letters to Trump’s missing transcripts, partial presidential records limit people’s full understanding of history – https://theconversation.com/from-washingtons-burned-letters-to-trumps-missing-transcripts-partial-presidential-records-limit-peoples-full-understanding-of-history-258275

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: AI tools collect and store data about you from all your devices – here’s how to be aware of what you’re revealing

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Christopher Ramezan, Assistant Professor of Cybersecurity, West Virginia University

    AI tools gather information about you from many types of devices, including smartphones. Prostock-Studio/Getty Images

    Like it or not, artificial intelligence has become part of daily life. Many devices – including electric razors and toothbrushes – have become “AI-powered,” using machine learning algorithms to track how a person uses the device, how the device is working in real time, and provide feedback. From asking questions to an AI assistant like ChatGPT or Microsoft Copilot to monitoring a daily fitness routine with a smartwatch, many people use an AI system or tool every day.

    While AI tools and technologies can make life easier, they also raise important questions about data privacy. These systems often collect large amounts of data, sometimes without people even realizing their data is being collected. The information can then be used to identify personal habits and preferences, and even predict future behaviors by drawing inferences from the aggregated data.

    As an assistant professor of cybersecurity at West Virginia University, I study how emerging technologies and various types of AI systems manage personal data and how we can build more secure, privacy-preserving systems for the future.

    Generative AI software uses large amounts of training data to create new content such as text or images. Predictive AI uses data to forecast outcomes based on past behavior, such as how likely you are to hit your daily step goal, or what movies you may want to watch. Both types can be used to gather information about you.

    How AI tools collect data

    Generative AI assistants such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini collect all the information users type into a chat box. Every question, response and prompt that users enter is recorded, stored and analyzed to improve the AI model.

    OpenAI’s privacy policy informs users that “we may use content you provide us to improve our Services, for example to train the models that power ChatGPT.” Even though OpenAI allows you to opt out of content use for model training, it still collects and retains your personal data. Although some companies promise that they anonymize this data, meaning they store it without naming the person who provided it, there is always a risk of data being reidentified.

    ChatGPT stores and analyzes everything you type into a prompt screen.
    Screenshot by Christopher Ramezan, CC BY-ND

    Predictive AI

    Beyond generative AI assistants, social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram and TikTok continuously gather data on their users to train predictive AI models. Every post, photo, video, like, share and comment, including the amount of time people spend looking at each of these, is collected as data points that are used to build digital data profiles for each person who uses the service.

    The profiles can be used to refine the social media platform’s AI recommender systems. They can also be sold to data brokers, who sell a person’s data to other companies to, for instance, help develop targeted advertisements that align with that person’s interests.

    Many social media companies also track users across websites and applications by putting cookies and embedded tracking pixels on their computers. Cookies are small files that store information about who you are and what you clicked on while browsing a website.

    One of the most common uses of cookies is in digital shopping carts: When you place an item in your cart, leave the website and return later, the item will still be in your cart because the cookie stored that information. Tracking pixels are invisible images or snippets of code embedded in websites that notify companies of your activity when you visit their page. This helps them track your behavior across the internet.

    This is why users often see or hear advertisements that are related to their browsing and shopping habits on many of the unrelated websites they browse, and even when they are using different devices, including computers, phones and smart speakers. One study found that some websites can store over 300 tracking cookies on your computer or mobile phone.

    Here’s how websites you browse can track you using cookies or tracking pixels.

    Data privacy controls – and limitations

    Like generative AI platforms, social media platforms offer privacy settings and opt-outs, but these give people limited control over how their personal data is aggregated and monetized. As media theorist Douglas Rushkoff argued in 2011, if the service is free, you are the product.

    Many tools that include AI don’t require a person to take any direct action for the tool to collect data about that person. Smart devices such as home speakers, fitness trackers and watches continually gather information through biometric sensors, voice recognition and location tracking. Smart home speakers continually listen for the command to activate or “wake up” the device. As the device is listening for this word, it picks up all the conversations happening around it, even though it does not seem to be active.

    Some companies claim that voice data is only stored when the wake word – what you say to wake up the device – is detected. However, people have raised concerns about accidental recordings, especially because these devices are often connected to cloud services, which allow voice data to be stored, synced and shared across multiple devices such as your phone, smart speaker and tablet.

    If the company allows, it’s also possible for this data to be accessed by third parties, such as advertisers, data analytics firms or a law enforcement agency with a warrant.

    Privacy rollbacks

    This potential for third-party access also applies to smartwatches and fitness trackers, which monitor health metrics and user activity patterns. Companies that produce wearable fitness devices are not considered “covered entities” and so are not bound by the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act. This means that they are legally allowed to sell health- and location-related data collected from their users.

    Concerns about HIPAA data arose in 2018, when Strava, a fitness company released a global heat map of user’s exercise routes. In doing so, it accidentally revealed sensitive military locations across the globe through highlighting the exercise routes of military personnel.

    Smart speakers can collect information even when they’re sleeping.
    recep-bg/Getty Images

    The Trump administration has tapped Palantir, a company that specializes in using AI for data analytics, to collate and analyze data about Americans. Meanwhile, Palantir has announced a partnership with a company that runs self-checkout systems.

    Such partnerships can expand corporate and government reach into everyday consumer behavior. This one could be used to create detailed personal profiles on Americans by linking their consumer habits with other personal data. This raises concerns about increased surveillance and loss of anonymity. It could allow citizens to be tracked and analyzed across multiple aspects of their lives without their knowledge or consent.

    Some smart device companies are also rolling back privacy protections instead of strengthening them. Amazon recently announced that starting on March 28, 2025, all voice recordings from Amazon Echo devices would be sent to Amazon’s cloud by default, and users will no longer have the option to turn this function off. This is different from previous settings, which allowed users to limit private data collection.

    Changes like these raise concerns about how much control consumers have over their own data when using smart devices. Many privacy experts consider cloud storage of voice recordings a form of data collection, especially when used to improve algorithms or build user profiles, which has implications for data privacy laws designed to protect online privacy.

    Implications for data privacy

    All of this brings up serious privacy concerns for people and governments on how AI tools collect, store, use and transmit data. The biggest concern is transparency. People don’t know what data is being collected, how the data is being used, and who has access to that data.

    Companies tend to use complicated privacy policies filled with technical jargon to make it difficult for people to understand the terms of a service that they agree to. People also tend not to read terms of service documents. One study found that people averaged 73 seconds reading a terms of service document that had an average read time of 29-32 minutes.

    Data collected by AI tools may initially reside with a company that you trust, but can easily be sold and given to a company that you don’t trust.

    AI tools, the companies in charge of them and the companies that have access to the data they collect can also be subject to cyberattacks and data breaches that can reveal sensitive personal information. These attacks can by carried out by cybercriminals who are in it for the money, or by so-called advanced persistent threats, which are typically nation/state- sponsored attackers who gain access to networks and systems and remain there undetected, collecting information and personal data to eventually cause disruption or harm.

    While laws and regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation in the European Union and the California Consumer Privacy Act aim to safeguard user data, AI development and use have often outpaced the legislative process. The laws are still catching up on AI and data privacy. For now, you should assume any AI-powered device or platform is collecting data on your inputs, behaviors and patterns.

    Using AI tools

    Although AI tools collect people’s data, and the way this accumulation of data affects people’s data privacy is concerning, the tools can also be useful. AI-powered applications can streamline workflows, automate repetitive tasks and provide valuable insights.

    But it’s crucial to approach these tools with awareness and caution.

    When using a generative AI platform that gives you answers to questions you type in a prompt, don’t include any personally identifiable information, including names, birth dates, Social Security numbers or home addresses. At the workplace, don’t include trade secrets or classified information. In general, don’t put anything into a prompt that you wouldn’t feel comfortable revealing to the public or seeing on a billboard. Remember, once you hit enter on the prompt, you’ve lost control of that information.

    Remember that devices which are turned on are always listening – even if they’re asleep. If you use smart home or embedded devices, turn them off when you need to have a private conversation. A device that’s asleep looks inactive, but it is still powered on and listening for a wake word or signal. Unplugging a device or removing its batteries is a good way of making sure the device is truly off.

    Finally, be aware of the terms of service and data collection policies of the devices and platforms that you are using. You might be surprised by what you’ve already agreed to.

    This article is part of a series on data privacy that explores who collects your data, what and how they collect, who sells and buys your data, what they all do with it, and what you can do about it.

    Previous articles in the series:

    How illicit markets fueled by data breaches sell your personal information to criminals

    Christopher Ramezan receives funding from the Appalachian Regional Commission.

    – ref. AI tools collect and store data about you from all your devices – here’s how to be aware of what you’re revealing – https://theconversation.com/ai-tools-collect-and-store-data-about-you-from-all-your-devices-heres-how-to-be-aware-of-what-youre-revealing-251693

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: AI literacy: What it is, what it isn’t, who needs it and why it’s hard to define

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Daniel S. Schiff, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Purdue University

    AI literacy is a lot more than simply knowing how to prompt an AI chatbot. DNY59/E+ via Getty Images

    It is “the policy of the United States to promote AI literacy and proficiency among Americans,” reads an executive order President Donald Trump issued on April 23, 2025. The executive order, titled Advancing Artificial Intelligence Education for American Youth, signals that advancing AI literacy is now an official national priority.

    This raises a series of important questions: What exactly is AI literacy, who needs it, and how do you go about building it thoughtfully and responsibly?

    The implications of AI literacy, or lack thereof, are far-reaching. They extend beyond national ambitions to remain “a global leader in this technological revolution” or even prepare an “AI-skilled workforce,” as the executive order states. Without basic literacy, citizens and consumers are not well equipped to understand the algorithmic platforms and decisions that affect so many domains of their lives: government services, privacy, lending, health care, news recommendations and more. And the lack of AI literacy risks ceding important aspects of society’s future to a handful of multinational companies.

    How, then, can institutions help people understand and use – or resist – AI as individuals, workers, parents, innovators, job seekers, students, employers and citizens? We are a policy scientist and two educational researchers who study AI literacy, and we explore these issues in our research.

    What AI literacy is and isn’t

    At its foundation, AI literacy includes a mix of knowledge, skills and attitudes that are technical, social and ethical in nature. According to one prominent definition, AI literacy refers to “a set of competencies that enables individuals to critically evaluate AI technologies; communicate and collaborate effectively with AI; and use AI as a tool online, at home, and in the workplace.”

    AI literacy is not simply programming or the mechanics of neural networks, and it is certainly not just prompt engineering – that is, the act of carefully writing prompts for chatbots. Vibe coding, or using AI to write software code, might be fun and important, but restricting the definition of literacy to the newest trend or the latest need of employers won’t cover the bases in the long term. And while a single master definition may not be needed, or even desirable, too much variation makes it tricky to decide on organizational, educational or policy strategies.

    Who needs AI literacy? Everyone, including the employees and students using it, and the citizens grappling with its growing impacts. Every sector and sphere of society is now involved with AI, even if this isn’t always easy for people to see.

    Exactly how much literacy everyone needs and how to get there is a much tougher question. Are a few quick HR training sessions enough, or do we need to embed AI across K-12 curricula and deliver university micro credentials and hands-on workshops? There is much that researchers don’t know, which leads to the need to measure AI literacy and the effectiveness of different training approaches.

    Ethics is an important aspect of AI literacy.

    Measuring AI literacy

    While there is a growing and bipartisan consensus that AI literacy matters, there’s much less consensus on how to actually understand people’s AI literacy levels. Researchers have focused on different aspects, such as technical or ethical skills, or on different populations – for example, business managers and students – or even on subdomains like generative AI.

    A recent review study identified more than a dozen questionnaires designed to measure AI literacy, the vast majority of which rely on self-reported responses to questions and statements such as “I feel confident about using AI.” There’s also a lack of testing to see whether these questionnaires work well for people from different cultural backgrounds.

    Moreover, the rise of generative AI has exposed gaps and challenges: Is it possible to create a stable way to measure AI literacy when AI is itself so dynamic?

    In our research collaboration, we’ve tried to help address some of these problems. In particular, we’ve focused on creating objective knowledge assessments, such as multiple-choice surveys tested with thorough statistical analyses to ensure that they accurately measure AI literacy. We’ve so far tested a multiple-choice survey in the U.S., U.K. and Germany and found that it works consistently and fairly across these three countries.

    There’s a lot more work to do to create reliable and feasible testing approaches. But going forward, just asking people to self-report their AI literacy probably isn’t enough to understand where different groups of people are and what supports they need.

    Approaches to building AI literacy

    Governments, universities and industry are trying to advance AI literacy.

    Finland launched the Elements of AI series in 2018 with the hope of educating its general public on AI. Estonia’s AI Leap initiative partners with Anthropic and OpenAI to provide access to AI tools for tens of thousands of students and thousands of teachers. And China is now requiring at least eight hours of AI education annually as early as elementary school, which goes a step beyond the new U.S. executive order. On the university level, Purdue University and the University of Pennsylvania have launched new master’s in AI programs, targeting future AI leaders.

    Despite these efforts, these initiatives face an unclear and evolving understanding of AI literacy. They also face challenges to measuring effectiveness and minimal knowledge on what teaching approaches actually work. And there are long-standing issues with respect to equity − for example, reaching schools, communities, segments of the population and businesses that are stretched or under-resourced.

    Next moves on AI literacy

    Based on our research, experience as educators and collaboration with policymakers and technology companies, we think a few steps might be prudent.

    Building AI literacy starts with recognizing it’s not just about tech: People also need to grasp the social and ethical sides of the technology. To see whether we’re getting there, we researchers and educators should use clear, reliable tests that track progress for different age groups and communities. Universities and companies can try out new teaching ideas first, then share what works through an independent hub. Educators, meanwhile, need proper training and resources, not just additional curricula, to bring AI into the classroom. And because opportunity isn’t spread evenly, partnerships that reach under-resourced schools and neighborhoods are essential so everyone can benefit.

    Critically, achieving widespread AI literacy may be even harder than building digital and media literacy, so getting there will require serious investment – not cuts – to education and research.

    There is widespread consensus that AI literacy is important, whether to boost AI trust and adoption or to empower citizens to challenge AI or shape its future. As with AI itself, we believe it’s important to approach AI literacy carefully, avoiding hype or an overly technical focus. The right approach can prepare students to become “active and responsible participants in the workforce of the future” and empower Americans to “thrive in an increasingly digital society,” as the AI literacy executive order calls for.

    Funding from Google Research helped to support part of the authors’ research on AI literacy.

    Funding from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research under the funding code 16DHBKI051 helped to support part of the authors’ research on AI literacy.

    Arne Bewersdorff does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. AI literacy: What it is, what it isn’t, who needs it and why it’s hard to define – https://theconversation.com/ai-literacy-what-it-is-what-it-isnt-who-needs-it-and-why-its-hard-to-define-256061

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Grattan on Friday: the galahs are chattering about ‘productivity’, but can Labor really get it moving?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

    Former prime minister Paul Keating famously used to say the resident galah in any pet shop was talking about micro-economic policy. These days, if you encounter a pet shop with a galah, she’ll be chattering about productivity.

    Productivity is currently the hot topic for a conversation on economic reform. Australia, like many other countries, has a serious problem with it. Our productivity hasn’t significantly increased for more than a decade (apart from a temporary spike during the pandemic).

    Now Treasurer Jim Chalmers has named productivity as his priority for Labor’s second term; assistant minister Andrew Leigh, part of the government’s economic team, has had it inserted into his title; the Productivity Commission has put out 15 potential reform areas for discussion, and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has announced a roundtable to canvass the way ahead.

    The roundtable appears to be a prime ministerial initiative. Announcing it at the National Press Club on Tuesday, Albanese made a point of saying he had asked Chalmers to convene it. Perhaps it’s a case of the prime minister emulating his forerunner Bob Hawke, with his penchant for summits, while Chalmers seeks to be a contemporary Keating, as he searches for reforms to promote.

    It would be a major achievement if people were able to remember the second-term Albanese government for paving the way for a significant lift in Australia’s productivity. It would probably also be an economic and political miracle.

    Let’s never knock a summit, but let’s not be taken in by the suggestion that the planned August meeting, involving employers, unions and the government, will mark some breakthrough moment. Business representatives are approaching it with a degree of cynicism; they saw the 2022 jobs and skills summit as preparing the ground for the new government to meet union demands.

    This summit is expected to have fewer participants than the 2022 meeting, and may be briefer. Albanese described it as “a more streamlined dialogue than the jobs and skills summit, dealing with a more targeted set of issues”. Chalmers will announce more details next week. We can expect the government will package a collection of initiatives at least for further work, and perhaps a few for early action.

    While many stakeholders give lip service to improving productivity, there are huge obstacles to actually doing so.

    There’s perennial talk about tax reform – from business and economists, rather than the government. But serious change produces winners and losers, and having “losers” has become a political no-no, especially when there is not enough money to compensate them.

    The housing crisis could be eased, with more homes built faster, if there were less onerous regulations, notably at state and local level. Governments are working around the edges of this, but attempting to seriously slash regulation immediately runs into opposition from those who, variously, argue that will harm city-scapes, the environment, safety or the like.

    Red tape hampers big projects, but interest groups concerned about fauna, flora or the climate defend extensive hurdles and appeals processes as important for other priorities.

    We’d be more productive if people with skills (whether immigrants or those moving between states) faced fewer complexities in getting their credentials recognised. But critics would point to the risk of underqualified people getting through.

    Regulations are both barriers and protections. Whether you see particular regulations as negative or positive will depend where you are coming from. Less regulation can enhance productivity – but in certain cases the trade-off can be less protection and/or more risk. We have, for good or ill, become a more risk-averse community.

    Employers say various industrial relations laws and regulations restrict changes that could boost productivity. A Labor government interlocked with the union movement is going to listen to its industrial base on that one. Asked on Tuesday whether his message to business groups going to the summit was, “don’t waste your breath if you’re going to raise IR” Albanese said, “People are entitled to raise whatever they want to raise. But I’m a Labor prime minister.”

    Artificial Intelligence presents great opportunities to advance productivity. But it will cost some jobs and produce dislocation. Industry Minister Tim Ayres said recently, “I will be looking in particular at how we can strengthen worker voice and agency as technology is diffused into every workplace in the Australian economy. I look forward to working with our trade union movement on all of this.” Employers’ ears pricked at the union reference.

    While the government is signalling it wants to do something meaningful on productivity, the prime minister is also highly cautious when it comes to getting ahead of what he considers to be the government’s electoral mandate. Nor is he one to gamble political capital.

    He is not like, for example, John Howard, who before the 1996 election said he would “never ever” have a GST, then brought forward an ambitious GST package that he took to the 1998 election. That package had plenty of compensation for losers but Howard, who had a big parliamentary majority, was nearly booted out of office.

    Reform is more difficult than it was in the Hawke–Keating era – though it wasn’t as easy then as is often portrayed now. The voters are less trusting of government, and less willing to accept the downsides of change.

    The voices of those wanting to say “no” to various proposed changes are greatly amplified, in a highly professionalised political milieu and ubiquitous media opportunities. In the era of the “permanent campaign”, opinion polling has become so constant that politicians are always measuring their support in the moment, making a government hyper-nervous.

    Progress on productivity is also harder these days because the easier things have been done, and because changes in our economy – especially the growth of the care economy – mean in some sectors efficiencies are not so readily available, or measurable.

    We don’t actually need more inquiries, or a roundtable, to come up with ideas for what could or should be done on productivity. There have been multiple reports and thousands of recommendations. What is required is for the government to devise a bold program, have the will and the skill to implement it, and the ability to sell it to the public. But that runs into the problem of not having sought permission from the voters – which forces the government back to incrementalism.

    Whatever the problems, it is not too fanciful to see Chalmers hanging his hat on the productivity peg in his longer-term bid to be the next Labor prime minister. We’ll see how he goes.

    Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Grattan on Friday: the galahs are chattering about ‘productivity’, but can Labor really get it moving? – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-the-galahs-are-chattering-about-productivity-but-can-labor-really-get-it-moving-257337

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Greenpeace activists aboard Rainbow Warrior disrupt Pacific industrial fishing operation

    By Emma Page

    Greenpeace activists on board the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior disrupted an industrial longlining fishing operation in the South Pacific, seizing almost 20 km of fishing gear and freeing nine sharks — including an endangered mako — near Australia and New Zealand.

    Crew retrieved the entire longline and more than 210 baited hooks from a European Union-flagged industrial fishing vessel, including an endangered longfin mako shark, eight near-threatened blue sharks and four swordfish.

    The crew also documented the vessel catching endangered sharks during its longlining operation.

    The at-sea action followed new Greenpeace Australia Pacific analysis exposing the extent of shark catch from industrial longlining in parts of the Pacific Ocean.

    Latest fisheries data showed that almost 70 percent of EU vessels’ catch was blue shark in 2023 alone.

    The operation came ahead of this week’s UN Ocean Conference in Nice, France, where world leaders are discussing ocean protection and the Global Ocean Treaty.

    On board the Rainbow Warrior, Greenpeace Australia Pacific campaigner Georgia Whitaker said: “These longliners are industrial killing machines. Greenpeace Australia Pacific took peaceful and direct action to disrupt this attack on marine life.

    “We saved important species that would otherwise have been killed or left to die on hooks.

    “The scale of industrial fishing — still legal on the high seas — is astronomical. These vessels claim to be targeting swordfish or tuna, but we witnessed shark after shark being hauled up by these industrial fleets, including three endangered sharks in just half an hour.


    Rainbow Warrior crew disrupt longline fishing in the Pacific.  Video: Greenpeace

    “Greenpeace is calling on world leaders at the UN Ocean Conference to protect 30 percent of the world’s oceans by 2030 from this wanton destruction.”

    Stingray caught as bycatch is hauled onboard the Lu Rong Yuan Lu 212 longliner vessel in the Tasman Sea.

    The Rainbow Warrior is in the South Pacific ocean to expose longline fishing and call on governments to ratify the Global Ocean Treaty and create a network of protected areas in the high seas.

    A Greenpeace activist frees a blue shark caught on a longline in the Pacific . . . the blue shark is currently listed as “Near Threatened” globally by the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature). Image: Greenpeace Pacific

    Greenpeace Aotearoa is calling on the New Zealand government to ratify the Global Ocean Treaty and help create global ocean sanctuaries, including in the Tasman Sea between Australia and New Zealand.

    New Zealand signed the agreement in 2023.

    More than two-thirds of sharks worldwide are endangered, and a third of those are at risk of extinction from overfishing.

    Over the last three weeks, the Rainbow Warrior has been documenting longlining vessels and practices off Australia’s east coast, including from Spain and China.

    Emma Page is Greenpeace Aotearoa’s communications lead, oceans and fisheries. Republished with permission.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: View from The Hill: Is the US playing cat and mouse ahead of expected Albanese-Trump talks?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

    For the first time in memory, an Australian prime minister is approaching a prospective meeting with a US president with a distinct feeling of wariness.

    Of course Anthony Albanese would deny it.

    But it’s undeniable the government is relieved that Albanese’s coming trip (for which he leaves Friday) won’t feature a visit to Washington with a meeting in the Oval Office. Having seen what happened publicly to some other leaders in such encounters, Albanese has at least avoided any such risk. Instead, Albanese and President Donald Trump are expected to meet on the sidelines of the G7 in Canada.

    Think about this. Normally, an Australian prime minister heading to North America would be deeply disappointed at not receiving an invitation to Washington, especially when he had not yet met the president face to face (although Albanese and Trump have had phone calls).

    The non-Washington encounter, expected on the sidelines of the G7, is less hazardous but still highly unpredictable for Albanese.

    It could go swimmingly. But that will depend on Trump’s mood on the day and what briefings he has had. And who can make sound predictions about any of that? Australian officials find the White House difficult to deal with or read.

    Now, on the cusp of Albanese’s trip, a US review of AUKUS has become public.

    The story appeared in the Financial Times, which quoted a Pentagon spokesperson saying the departmental review was to ensure “this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the president’s ‘America First’ agenda”. The spokesperson noted US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth had “made clear his intent to ensure the [defence] department is focused on the Indo-Pacific region first and foremost”.

    The review is to be led by the undersecretary of defence for policy, Elbridge Colby, who months ago flagged the US wanted Australia to be spending some 3% of GDP on defence. This was upped to 3.5% in a recent meeting between Defence Minister Richard Marles and Hegseth.

    The Australian government is playing down the AUKUS review as being more or less routine. Marles said he has known about it for some time. He told Sky, “I am comfortable about it and I think it’s a pretty natural step for an incoming government to take and we’ll have an opportunity to engage with it”.

    Nevertheless, the fact of the review and the timing of the report about it will turn the screws on Albanese over defence spending.

    The prime minister makes two points on this – that Australia takes its own decisions, and that defence spending should be set on the basis of the capability needed rather than determined by a set percentage.

    But there is a general view among experts that Australia will need to boost substantially its spending. Albanese won’t want to capitulate on the issue, but he will need some diplomatic lines. He could point out Australia has its next Strategic Defence Review in 2026. This is more an update on delivery than a fundamental review but could give an opportunity for a rethink.

    On AUKUS, Albanese will want to reinforce its mutual benefits and importance. He canvassed AUKUS in his first call with Trump, after the presidential election.

    The president may or may not be briefed on the latest attacks on the pact by two former prime ministers, triggered by the review.

    Paul Keating, an unrelenting critic of the agreement, said in a statement the AUKUS review “might very well be the moment Washington saves Australia from itself”.

    Malcolm Turnbull said in a social media post that the United Kingdom and the United States are conducting reviews of AUKUS but “Australia, which has the most at stake, has no review”.

    The Trump–Albanese conversation could be complicated by the Australian government’s imposition this week of sanctions on two hardline Israeli ministers for inciting violence against Palestinians in the West Bank.

    This action, in concert with the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Norway, was immediately condemned by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who called for the sanctions to be withdrawn.

    All this before we even get to the issue of tariffs, and Australia offering a deal on critical minerals to try to get some concessions.

    There is a lot of scripting prepared before such meetings. Albanese will have his talking points down pat. But with Trump being an “off-script” man, it is not an occasion for which the PM can be confident ahead of time that he is fully prepared.

    But Albanese has one safeguard, in domestic political terms. If things went pear-shaped Australians – who have scant regard for Trump – could be expected to blame the president rather than the prime minister.

    Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. View from The Hill: Is the US playing cat and mouse ahead of expected Albanese-Trump talks? – https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-is-the-us-playing-cat-and-mouse-ahead-of-expected-albanese-trump-talks-257336

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Global outrage over Gaza has reinforced a ‘siege mentality’ in Israel – what are the implications for peace?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Eyal Mayroz, Senior Lecturer in Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Sydney

    After more than 20 months of devastating violence in Gaza, the right-wing Israeli government’s pursuit of two irreconcilable objectives — “destroying” Hamas and releasing Israeli hostages — has left the coastal strip in ruins.

    At least 54,000 Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli military, close to two million have been forcibly displaced, and many are starving. These atrocities have provoked intense moral outrage around the world and turned Israel into a pariah state.

    Meanwhile, Hamas is resolved to retain control over Gaza, even at the cost of sacrificing numerous innocent Palestinian lives for its own survival.

    Both sides have been widely accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and mainly in Israel’s case, genocide.

    While the obstacles to ending the fighting remain stubbornly difficult to overcome, a troubling pattern has become increasingly apparent.

    The very outrage that succeeded in mobilising, sustaining and swelling international opinion against Israel’s actions — a natural psychological response to systematic injustice — has also reinforced a “siege mentality” already present among many in its Jewish population.

    This siege mentality may have undermined more proactive Israeli Jewish public support for a ceasefire and “day-after” concessions.

    A toxic cocktail of emotions

    Several dominant groups have shaped the conflict’s dynamics, each driven by a distinct set of emotional responses.

    For many Israeli Jews, the massacres of October 7 have aggravated longstanding feelings of victimhood and mistrust, fears of terrorist attacks, perceptions of existential threats, intergenerational traumas stemming from the Holocaust, and importantly, the strong sense of siege mentality.

    Together, these emotions have produced a toxic blend of anger, hatred and intense desire for revenge.

    For the Palestinians, Israel’s devastation of Gaza has followed decades of oppressive occupation, endless rights violations, humiliation and dispossession. This has exacerbated feelings of hopelessness, fear and abandonment by the world.

    The wider, global pro-Palestinian camp has been driven by moral outrage over the atrocities being committed in Gaza, alongside empathy for the victims and a sense of guilt over Western governments’ complicity in the killings through the provision of arms to Israel.

    Similarly, for Israel’s supporters around the world, anger and resentment have led to feelings of persecution, and in turn, victimisation and a sense of siege.

    Many on both sides have become prisoners of this moral outrage. And this has suppressed compassion for the suffering of the “other” — those we perceive as perpetrators of injustice against the side we support.

    Complaints of bias and content omissions

    Choosing sides in a conflict translates almost inevitably into biases in how we select, process and assess new information.

    We search for content that confirms what we already believe. And we discount information that would go against our pre-existing perceptions.

    This tendency also increases our sensitivity to omissions of facts we deem important for our cause.

    Since early in the crisis, voices in the two camps have accused the mainstream media in the West of biased coverage in favour of the “other”. These feelings have added fuel to the moral outrage and sense of injustice among both sides.

    Outrage in the pro-Israel camp has focused mainly on a perceived global conspiracy to absolve Hamas of any responsibility.

    In that view, Israel has been singled out as the only culpable party for the killings in Gaza. This is despite the fact Hamas unleashed the violence on October 7, used the Gazan population as human shields while hiding in tunnels, and refused to release all the Israeli hostages to end the fighting.

    On the other side, pro-Palestinian outrage has focused on “blatant” omissions by the media and Western governments of important historical facts that could provide context for the October 7 attacks.

    These included:

    On both sides, then, significant focus has been placed on omissions of facts that could support one’s own narrative or cause.

    A siege mentality in Israel

    Many Israelis continue to relive October 7 while remaining decidedly blind to the daily horrors their military inflicts on Gaza in their name. For them, the global outrage has reinforced a long-existing and potent siege mentality.

    This mindset has been fed by a reluctance to directly challenge Israeli soldiers risking their lives and other rally-around-the-flag effects. It’s also been bolstered by the desire for revenge and an intense campaign of dehumanising all Palestinians — Hamas or not.

    The so-called “ring of fire” created around Israel by Iran and its proxies —Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Houthis — has further amplified this siege mentality. Their stated objective is the destruction of Israel.

    I’ve conducted an exploratory study of Israeli media, government statements and English Jewish diaspora publications from October 2023 to May 2025, reviewing some 5,000 articles and video clips.

    In this research, I’ve identified strong, consistent uses of siege mentality language, phrases such as:

    In a detailed analysis of 65 English articles from major Israeli outlets, such as The Jerusalem Post and Times of Israel, and Jewish publications in the United States, United Kingdom and Australia, I found siege mentality language in nearly nine out of ten searches.

    Importantly, nearly half of these occurrences were in response to pro-Palestinian rhetoric or advocacy: campus protests and actions targeting Israelis or Jews, university groups refusing to condemn October 7, or foreign governments’ recognition of Palestinian statehood.

    The sharp increase in attacks on Jews and Jewish installations since October 7 has also sparked global debates over rising antisemitism. Distinguishing honest critiques of Israel’s actions in Gaza from antisemitic rhetoric has become contentious, as has the use of antisemitism claims by Israeli leaders to dismiss much of this criticism.

    Moving forward

    When viewed through the prism of injustice, the strong asymmetry between Israeli and Palestinian suffering has long been apparent. But it’s grown even wider following Israel’s brutal responses to October 7.

    The culpability of Israel’s government and Hamas for the atrocities in Gaza is incontestable. However, many in the Israeli-Jewish public must also share some of the blame for refusing to stand up to – or by actively supporting – their extremist government’s policies.

    The pro-Palestine movement’s justice-driven campaigns have done much to combat international bystanding and motivate governments to act. At the same time, the unwillingness to unite behind a clearer unequivocal condemnation of Hamas’ massacres may have been a strategic mistake.

    By ignoring or minimising the targeting of civilians, the hostage-taking and the reports of sexual violence committed by Hamas, a vocal minority of advocates has weakened the movement’s otherwise strong moral authority with some of the audiences it needed to influence most. First and foremost, this is people in Israel itself.

    My research suggests that while injustice-based outrage can be effective at generating attention and engagement, it can also produce negative side effects. One adverse impact has been the polarisation of the public debate over Gaza, which, in turn, has contributed to the intensification of Israelis’ siege mentality.

    Noam Chomsky, a well-known Jewish academic and fierce critic of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, once noted in relation to Palestinian advocacy:

    You have to ask yourself, when you conduct some tactic, what the effect is going to be on the victims. You don’t pursue a tactic because it makes you feel good.

    The question, then, is how to harness the strong mobilising power of moral outrage for positive ends – preventing bystander apathy to atrocities – without the potential negative consequences. These include polarisation, expanded violence, feeding a siege mentality (when applicable), and making peace negotiations more difficult.

    The children in Gaza and elsewhere in the world deserve advocacy that will prioritise their welfare over the release of moral outrage — however justified.

    So, what approaches would most effectively help end the suffering?

    Most immediately, the solution rests primarily with Israel and, by extension, the Trump administration as the only international actor powerful enough to force Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to halt the killings.

    Beyond that, and looking toward the future, justice-based activism should be grounded in universal moral principles, acknowledge all innocent victims, and work to create space for both societies to recognise each other’s humanity.

    I served as a counterterrorism specialist with the Israeli Defence Forces in the 1980s.

    – ref. Global outrage over Gaza has reinforced a ‘siege mentality’ in Israel – what are the implications for peace? – https://theconversation.com/global-outrage-over-gaza-has-reinforced-a-siege-mentality-in-israel-what-are-the-implications-for-peace-258561

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Caitlin Johnstone: Staring down the barrel of war with Iran once again

    Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific. –

    COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone

    Well it looks like the US is on the precipice of war with Iran again.

    US officials are telling the press that they anticipate a potential impending Israeli attack on Iran while the family members of US military personnel are being assisted with evacuation from bases in the region.

    This comes as Tehran issues a warning that it will strike all US military bases within range of its missiles if it comes under attack. There are reportedly some 50,000 US troops in 10 bases which could come under fire should this occur.

    The US is also evacuating its embassy in Iraq, and has authorised the departure of non-essential personnel from its embassies in Kuwait and Bahrain.

    Asked by the press about the evacuations, President Trump said, “They are being moved out because it could be a dangerous place, and we’ll see what happens. We’ve given notice to move out.”

    Trump is openly declaring a willingness to strike Iran if nuclear negotiations fall through, while saying he is now “much less confident” that any deal will be made.


    Staring down the barrel of war with Iran.    Video: Caitlin Johnstone

    “If they don’t make a deal, they’re not gonna have a nuclear weapon; if they do make a deal they’re not gonna have a nuclear weapon too,” the president said in an interview published on Wednesday, adding that “it would be nicer to do it without warfare, without people dying.”

    If the US backs an Israeli attack on Iran and then Iran retaliates by killing a bunch of US military personnel, we could be looking at a full-scale direct war between the US and Iran.

    As I’ve said in this space many times before, this would be the absolute worst-case nightmare scenario for the Middle East, unleashing horrors that dwarf all the other terrible abuses currently happening in the region.

    As Trump’s now-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said in 2019 (back when she publicly opposed Trump’s warmongering), “What is important that the American people know is a war with Iran would make the war in Iraq look like a cakewalk.”

    It’s so stupid that this keeps happening. This could all be avoided by the US simply ceasing to support the genocidal apartheid state of Israel no matter what it does.

    The fact that Washington has continued to pour weapons into Israel despite all its warmongering and genocide since 2023 means the US supports everything that Israel has been doing.

    If a war with Iran does occur, you will doubtless hear Western pundits and politicians trying to spin this as America getting “drawn into” another war in the Middle East, or Trump being tricked or manipulated into war.

    But make no mistake: the US could have turned away from this path at any time, and still can.

    If this Pandora’s box is opened, it will be because the US empire knowingly chose to open it.

    Caitlin Johnstone is an Australian independent journalist and poet. Her articles include The UN Torture Report On Assange Is An Indictment Of Our Entire Society. She publishes a website and Caitlin’s Newsletter. This article is republished with permission.

    This article was first published on Café Pacific.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Progress reported out of Bougainville independence talks at Burnham

    By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist

    Reports in Papua New Guinea say the governments of Bougainville and PNG have agreed to table the 2019 independence referendum results in Parliament.

    While discussions are ongoing, some degree of consensus has been reached during the talks, being held at Burnham Military Camp, just outside of Christchurch in New Zealand’s South Island.

    The talks are not open to the media.

    The PNG government agreed to a Bougainville request for a moderator to be brought in to solve an impasse over the tabling of the region’s independence referendum. Image: 123rf/RNZ Pacific

    A massive 97.7 percent of Bougainvillians voted for independence in 2019.

    Former Bougainville president John Momis told delegates in Burnham to “take the bull by the horn” and confront the independence issue without further delay.

    Both governments have agreed to present three highly pivotal documents to the PNG National Parliament.

    Apart from the referendum results, there will be the moderator’s report, and the parliamentary bipartisan committee’s findings.

    The commitment was formally conveyed by PNG’s Minister of Bougainville Affairs, Manaseh Makiba.

    Only sovereignty acceptable
    Meanwhile, the ABG President, Ishmael Toroama, said Bougainville would not accept a governance model that did not grant sovereignty.

    This comes amid talk of other options, such as self-government in free association.

    To achieve membership of the United Nations sovereignty is needed.

    Writing in the Post-Courier, journalist Gorethy Kenneth said the Bougainville national leaders, for the “first time have come out in aligning with the Bougainville team in New Zealand”.

    She reported that Police Minister and Bougainville regional MP Peter Tsiamalili Jr said he was in a peculiar position but he represented the 97.7 percent who voted for independence and he would go with the wishes of his people.

    The ICT Minister, and South Bougainville MP Timothy Masiu also said his one vote in Parliament would be for independence as far as his people were concerned.

    The PNG government has spoken previously of fears that independence for Bougainville would encourage other provinces to seek autonomy.

    Provinces, such as New Ireland, have made no secret of their dissatisfaction with Port Moresby and desire to control more of their own affairs.

    But the Bougainville Minister of Independence Implementation, Ezekiel Massat, said Bougainville’s status was constitutionally “ring-fenced” and could not set a precedent for other provinces.

    He said “under the Bougainville Peace Agreement, independence is a compulsory option”.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Not all insecure work has to be a ‘bad job’: research shows job design can make a big difference

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rose-Marie Stambe, Adjunct Research Fellow, social and economic marginalisation, The University of Queensland

    Matej Kastelic/Shutterstock

    Inflation has steadied and interest rates are finally coming down. But for many Australians, especially those in low-paid, insecure or precarious work, the cost-of-living crisis feels far from over.

    The federal government has recently focused on improving outcomes for this group in a number of ways. Labor has advocated strongly for real wage increases and taken measures to protect weekend penalty rates.

    Such wage-based policies go some way towards addressing workers’ financial struggles. But they aren’t the only way to improve workers’ lives.

    We know that in contemporary society, having a job is important for subjective wellbeing. We also know not all jobs are equal in terms of quality. Permanent, full-time employment is considered the gold standard, with insecure or precarious work the most detrimental.

    Yet not all insecure work is the same. Our recent study provides additional evidence that how a job is designed may be just as important as what kind of job it is. It also hints at the ingredients for designing better jobs.

    Good jobs, bad jobs

    Many books – from Arne Kalleberg’s Good jobs, Bad jobs to Guy Standing’s The Precariat – have explored the negative impacts job insecurity can have on individuals, their families and communities.

    “Bad jobs” are more likely to affect waged workers with low levels of education or those with a history of unemployment.

    But many different types of insecure work are bundled into what researchers call “contingent employment” – which can include labour hire, casual work and self-employment. And not all have to be “bad jobs”.

    Labour hire is one common form of ‘contingent employment’ arrangements.
    VisualArtStudio/Shutterstock

    Our research

    Using 16 years of nationally representative data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey, we examined the relationship between different forms of contingent employment and job satisfaction.

    We found the link between employment type and job satisfaction (our proxy for worker wellbeing) isn’t straightforward. Some forms of contingent work are clearly worse for workers. Others, under the right conditions, can support job satisfaction and wellbeing.

    This is where it becomes important to understand the concept of “job resources” – such as high skill use, autonomy or job security – which help to reduce the cost of meeting job demands.

    Without adequate resources to support job demands, workers’ wellbeing can suffer, including through increased risk of burnout.

    It all depends on job design

    We found that job satisfaction varies significantly across different kinds of contingent roles.

    For example, self-employment is, on average, associated with higher job satisfaction. Our study suggests a number of reasons for this, including that this group enjoys greater autonomy, more flexibility and more opportunities to use a range of skills.

    In our study, self-employment was associated with high job satisfaction.
    Jacob Lund/Shutterstock

    These “job resources” appear to compensate for the lack of traditional employment benefits, such as job security.

    At the other end of the spectrum, labour hire workers (who are hired by a labour hire agency and then supplied to a host organisation to perform work under its direction), experience lower job satisfaction than permanent workers.

    While these jobs tend to be less demanding in terms of workload, they offer very few job resources. Labour hire positions are often marked by low levels of autonomy, minimal skill use and little opportunity for development.

    These conditions are closely linked with lower motivation, disengagement and long-term dissatisfaction.

    Casual differences

    Casual employment sits somewhere in the middle, and our findings reveal important gender differences.

    For men, we found casual work is associated with lower job satisfaction. For women, however, the picture is more complicated.

    Our analysis suggests women in casual jobs may experience certain unmeasured benefits, such as work-life balance, that offset some of the downsides.

    We couldn’t directly measure these benefits in our dataset. But our results align with other studies, showing how the flexibility of casual work can be useful for some women with caregiving responsibilities.

    There were gender differences in the satisfaction levels associated with casual work.
    Vitalii Vodolazskyi/Shutterstock

    Job design is the missing link

    What connects these findings is the role of job characteristics. Across the board, we found that features like skill use, autonomy, task variety and flexibility play a major role in shaping workers’ satisfaction.

    When insecure jobs include these positive characteristics, they can be satisfying. When they don’t, the downsides build on each other.

    In an ideal world, there should be a perfect trade-off between positive and negative job characteristics. For example, jobs with undesirable characteristics, such as job insecurity, would offer higher wages to attract workers or other desirable characteristics.

    In our study, that only held true for some groups, such as self-employed workers and women in casual roles. For many others, casual or labour hire jobs offer neither security nor satisfaction.

    Designing better jobs

    These findings have implications for how we think about work and wellbeing.

    For employers and policy makers the message is clear: improving job quality isn’t just about offering permanent contracts. While security matters, it’s also about how the job itself is designed.

    Even in non-permanent roles, providing workers with more autonomy, opportunities to use their skills, and flexible scheduling can significantly improve job satisfaction and retention. It’s also important for supporting gender equality in the workplace.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Not all insecure work has to be a ‘bad job’: research shows job design can make a big difference – https://theconversation.com/not-all-insecure-work-has-to-be-a-bad-job-research-shows-job-design-can-make-a-big-difference-257642

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Cheating by car makers, tampering by owners: crucial car pollution control is being sabotaged

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Robin Smit, Adjunct Professor of Transport, University of Technology Sydney

    Peter Cade/Getty

    Emission control systems in modern cars have slashed air pollutants such as particulate matter and nitrogen oxides.

    But these systems face two major challenges: carmakers cheating on pollution tests and owner tampering. Cheating means high-polluting cars can be sold when they shouldn’t be, while tampering can increase some pollutants up to 100 times.

    In our new research review, we found the impacts of cheating and tampering on emissions of pollutants are substantial across the globe. For instance, researchers in Spain found almost half the diesel trucks had been tampered with, while the Volkswagen Dieselgate cheating scandal uncovered in 2015 led to an estimated A$60 billion in health costs in the European Union. In California, researchers found one in 12 trucks had a damaged or malfunctioning diesel particulate filter – and these high-emitting trucks contributed 70% of the entire fleet’s emissions of tiny particulate matter.

    The solutions? Better detection of tampering, cheating and malfunctioning emission systems – and vigilance to get high polluting cars off the road.

    Catalytic converters and other emissions control systems have slashed air pollutant emissions from modern cars.
    Virrage Images/Shutterstock

    How did we get here?

    From the 1950s onwards, smog, air pollution and health issues from car exhausts led many regulators to require carmakers to reduce dangerous air pollutants.

    These days, modern combustion-engine cars are complex computer-controlled systems optimised to balance engine performance, durability and emission control. When working properly, new vehicles can reduce air pollutant emissions by 90% or more. However, they can increase carbon dioxide emissions by using slightly more fuel.

    But these pollutants can soar if emissions control systems malfunction – or suffer from intentional cheating or tampering.

    Cheating and tampering are not new. Cheating was first reported in the 1970s and it’s still happening. Tampering, too, dates back to the 1970s.

    Both issues worsen air quality. These excess air pollutants have substantial costs to human health, as they can trigger respiratory conditions and can cause disability and premature death.

    While the numbers of electric vehicles are rising, they’re only about 5% of the global fleet – about 60 million compared to about 1.5 billion cars powered by petrol, diesel and gas.

    Because cars have relatively long lifespans, many fossil-fuel powered cars will still be in use in 2050, now just 25 years away. Many will be exported from rich countries to developing economies. That means effective pollutant control still matters.

    Cheating by manufacturers

    It’s well established combustion engine cars produce substantially more emissions and pollutants during real-world driving than they do in regulatory tests.

    There are many reasons for this, including natural wear and tear. But one big reason may be cheating.

    Authorities in many nations rely on testing to see if a new model is emitting at rates low enough to meet emission standards.

    Manufacturers can take advantage of the known quirks of official tests and intentionally alter how their vehicles operate during testing. To do this, they may install a “defeat device”, usually deep in the car’s engine or its computer code.

    These devices shift the car to a special low-emissions mode if testing is detected. They’re typically easy for the automaker to install and difficult to detect.

    Car makers can cheat on emission tests by installing defeat devices or other countermeasures.
    Belish/Shutterstock

    Defeat devices are mainly found in diesel cars and trucks, since diesel emissions control systems are more complicated and expensive than petrol or LPG. Adding an emission control system to meet Euro 6 standards costs about $600 for a petrol car. For diesel, the cost can be three to five times higher.

    In 2015, the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the state of California announced Volkswagen had been using a software-based defeat device to make its diesel cars appear substantially cleaner. The scandal drew worldwide attention and cost the company about $50 billion.

    For those caught, large fines and mandatory recalls have followed. But this hasn’t been enough to stop the practice.

    The way these tests are conducted usually has to be disclosed by law to ensure transparency and make results comparable and repeatable. Unfortunately, having detailed knowledge of the tests makes it easier to cheat.

    Tampering by car owners

    Tampering is largely done by owners of diesel cars and trucks. Owners can tamper with emission control systems to improve performance, rebel against laws they don’t agree with or avoid extra costs such as Adblue, a liquid needed to reduce nitrogen oxides emissions from diesel trucks.

    Tampering is usually illegal. But that hasn’t stopped the production of aftermarket tampering devices, such as software which deactivates emission control systems. It’s not necessarily illegal to sell these devices, but it is illegal to install and use them.

    In the road freight sector, the use of aftermarket tampering by vehicle owners also acts as an unfair economic advantage by undercutting responsible and law-abiding operators.

    What should be done?

    Combustion engine cars and trucks will be on the world’s roads for decades to come.

    Ensuring they run as cleanly as possible over their lifetime will require independent and in-service emissions testing. Authorities will also need to focus on enforcement.

    Creating an internationally agreed test protocol for the detection of defeat devices will also be necessary.

    Combating tampering by owners as well as malfunctioning emissions systems will require better detection efforts, either through on-road emissions testing or during a car service.

    One approach would be to add telemetry to the onboard diagnostics systems now common in modern cars. Telemetry radio transponders can report emissions problems to the owner and relevant authorities, who can then act.

    Shifting to EVs offers the most robust and cost-effective way to combat fraud and cut exhaust pollutants and carbon emissions from road transport. But this will take decades. Authorities need to ensure diesel and petrol vehicles run as cleanly as possible until they can be retired.

    Robin Smit is the founding Research Director at the Transport Energy/Emission Research (TER) consultancy.

    Alberto Ayala does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Cheating by car makers, tampering by owners: crucial car pollution control is being sabotaged – https://theconversation.com/cheating-by-car-makers-tampering-by-owners-crucial-car-pollution-control-is-being-sabotaged-255882

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: IVF is big business. But when patients become customers, what does this mean for their care?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hilary Bowman-Smart, Research Fellow, Australian Centre for Precision Health, University of South Australia

    Monash IVF CEO Michael Knaap has resigned after one of the company’s Melbourne clinics mistakenly transferred the wrong embryo to a patient. The patient wanted her partner’s embryo, but instead her own embryo was transferred.

    It is the second time this year Monash IVF has made such an announcement. In April, the company revealed a clinic in Brisbane had mixed up two different couples’ embryos.

    IVF is big business in Australia. When Monash IVF was listed on the stock exchange in 2014, it raised more than A$300 million, with financial analysts noting the potential for massive profits, as “people will pay almost anything to have a baby”.

    Total annual revenue in Australia from the IVF industry is more than $800 million. But what does the booming IVF industry mean for patients?

    Strong regulation is crucial

    In Australia, regulation of the IVF industry largely happens at the state and territory level. This leads to variation, such as restrictions on single women accessing IVF in Western Australia, which other states do not have.

    Victoria passed legislation in 2008, with a guiding principle to safeguard children born through assisted reproduction. However, until recently, Queensland largely relied on industry self-regulation.

    The Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand, the peak body for reproductive medicine, has called for a national regulatory framework to address the current “patchwork” of legislation.

    Commercialisation is not necessarily a bad thing for patients. It can lead to innovation that improves the chances of successfully having a baby.

    However, clinicians, ethicists and patients have raised concerns about the effects of commercialisation on the quality and cost of service provision in IVF.

    With the rapid growth of the sector and high-profile incidents such as those at Monash IVF, stronger and more comprehensive regulation at the national level can help ensure quality and safety for patients.

    High costs can lead to inequities in access

    Most IVF in Australia occurs in private practice, not the public system. While Medicare rebates are available, there is usually a significant out-of-pocket expense. This can range from a few hundred dollars to many thousands for each cycle. IVF can therefore be a big financial decision. Financial expense is one of the biggest barriers, which leads to inequities in access between those who can afford it and those who can’t.

    The costs stack up even more if you want non-essential “add-ons”, such as pre-implantation genetic testing, acupuncture, or embryo time-lapse imaging. A study in 2021 found 82% of women using IVF in Australia had used an add-on during their IVF treatment.

    Many IVF clinics offer these add-ons, which are promoted as improving patient experience, or the chance of a successful birth. Add-ons are offered as a point of difference on the market.

    However, the evidence for these claims is often weak or non-existent. They also come with significant costs and can potentially take advantage of people’s hopes, if they are willing to pay “whatever it takes” to have a baby.



    Read more:
    IVF add-ons: why you should be cautious of these expensive procedures if you’re trying to conceive

    Patients or customers?

    Commercial providers in the IVF industry can help provide choice, particularly as it is difficult to get IVF in the public system.

    However, when health care becomes a business, a risk is that the relationship between the patient and doctor can be affected: a patient seeking treatment becomes a “customer” buying a product.

    The therapeutic relationship should be about enhancing patients’ health and wellbeing, relieving suffering, and promoting human flourishing.

    When we talk about “choice” in medicine, we often think about ideas such as informed consent, autonomy and the best interests of the patient. However, if we think of patients as customers, “choice” may become more about being free to purchase what you want to.

    The commercialisation of the sector can also increase the risk of over-servicing, where financial incentives may shape medical decision-making.

    This doesn’t necessarily mean clinics are making deliberate decisions or misleading patients for financial benefit. However, it can mean doing more IVF cycles, even as success becomes increasingly unlikely.

    We need to ensure doctors don’t feel pressure – directly or indirectly – to provide particular treatments just because a patient is willing to pay for it.

    Medical professionals’ obligations

    Doctors and other healthcare professionals have special responsibilities and moral obligations because of their role. They serve an essential human need in society because of their particular expertise in health and wellbeing. And they often have a monopoly on the essential services they offer.

    Without patients’ trust that clinicians are being guided by medical reasons instead of financial ones, their special and privileged role to promote human flourishing can be undermined.

    This special role is not necessarily incompatible with business. However, it is essential we allow doctors to maintain their focus on patient wellbeing. This is reflected in the doctors’ code of conduct, which notes their “duty to make the care of patients their first concern”.

    What happens next?

    Much public and media discourse has framed the embryo mix-up primarily as a reputational and financial risk to Monash IVF – but it is about patients. It’s not (just) an error of corporate governance, it’s about the special trust that we as a society place in medical practice.

    IVF is expensive, and can be tough both emotionally and physically. One of the ways we can ensure trust in IVF services is by moving towards consistent and improved regulation at the national level. This might include more uniform standards and policies around who is eligible for IVF.

    IVF industry regulation is on the agenda for the federal and state health ministers tomorrow. While there is still much to be done, a review of the regulation and processes in this sector could help prevent more embryo mix-ups from happening in the future.



    Read more:
    Why do women get ‘reassurance scans’ during pregnancy? And how can you spot a dodgy provider?

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. IVF is big business. But when patients become customers, what does this mean for their care? – https://theconversation.com/ivf-is-big-business-but-when-patients-become-customers-what-does-this-mean-for-their-care-258585

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: In most mammals, one gene determines sex. But 100 million years ago, platypuses and echidnas went their own way

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Linda Shearwin, Researcher, Comparative Genome Biology Laboratory, University of Adelaide

    Rob D / Shutterstock

    For decades, scientists have known that platypuses and echidnas – Australia’s unique egg-laying mammals – have another developmental quirk: they don’t use the same genetic toolkit as other mammals to develop male and female embryos.

    What’s more, just how they do it has been a mystery. Until now.

    In a recent study published in Genome Biology, our research team has found strong evidence that monotreme sex comes down to a single gene – one that’s much more like what we see in some fish and amphibians than other mammals.

    The search for the secret of monotreme sex

    The Australian platypus and echidna are monotremes, the most ancient living group of mammals. These unique creatures are famously the only mammals to lay eggs, and they also have other reptile-like features.

    Humans and many other mammal species have two sex-determining chromosomes, X and Y. An embryo with an XX pair of chromosomes will develop as female, while an XY pair leads to a male embryo.

    In many mammals, the process that makes an embryo develop as male is triggered by a gene called SRY on the male Y chromosome. However, the SRY gene in monotremes has never been found.

    About 20 years ago, it was discovered that monotremes have an entirely different system that uses multiple X and Y chromosomes. Scientists assumed the Y chromosomes must still hold a gene that determined sex, but very little was known about what it might be.

    In 2008 a full genome sequence of a platypus was published, which was a step in the right direction. However, the genome was from a female so it had no information about Y chromosomes.

    By 2021, a new and improved platypus genome and a first echidna genome included sequences of multiple Y chromosomes. A gene emerged as the frontrunner for the role of sex determination in monotremes: the anti-Muellerian hormone (or AMH), which is involved in the sexual development in many animals.

    A 100-million-year-old change

    Our new research provides the first real evidence that an adapted version of AMH found on one of the monotreme Y chromosomes (dubbed AMHY) is the sex determination gene in monotremes.

    We showed that changes in the AMH gene long ago, early in the evolution of monotremes, could explain how AMHY arose and took on a role in male sexual development.

    This event would have set the stage for the evolution of the novel sex chromosome system in the ancestor of today’s platypus and echidna, about 100 million years ago when the AMH gene on the XY chromosomes embarked on separated paths.

    We showed that although the AMHY gene has changed significantly from the original AMH gene (AMHX), it has retained its essential features. Importantly, we could show for the first time that AMHY is turned on in the right tissue and at the right time to direct development of the testes during male development, which was an important missing piece of the puzzle.

    A first for mammals

    Unlike the other mammal sex determination genes, which act directly on the DNA to switch on other genes that lead to male development, AMHY is a hormone. It does not interact with DNA, but instead acts at the surface of cells to turn genes on or off.

    There is growing evidence that AMHY also plays a role in sex determination in a number of fish and amphibian species. However, AMHY in monotremes would be the first known example of a hormone playing a sex-determining role in mammals.

    What’s next? Our ongoing research investigate in detail how AMHX and AMHY work differently in monotremes compared to other mammals.

    The work discussed in this article was carried out by researchers from the University of Adelaide, the University of Melbourne, the University of Queensland, Monash University and Currumbin Wildlife Sanctuary.

    Linda Shearwin receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    Frank Grützner does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. In most mammals, one gene determines sex. But 100 million years ago, platypuses and echidnas went their own way – https://theconversation.com/in-most-mammals-one-gene-determines-sex-but-100-million-years-ago-platypuses-and-echidnas-went-their-own-way-258801

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –