BISMARCK, N.D. – U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND) announced Space Development Agency (SDA) Director Derek Tournear and General Michael Guetlein, Vice Chief of Space Operations for the United States Space Force, will join him in visiting the University of North Dakota (UND), Grand Forks Air Force Base, and Cavalier Space Force Station.
“The buildup of ground-based capabilities at Grand Forks Air Force Base and the warfighting support offered by Cavalier Space Force Station are critical to our national security and security around the world,”said Cramer. “The University of North Dakota’s ability to educate students and prepare them for these rewarding jobs in the military, and to support our military, are really another competitive advantage our state has when it comes to attracting cutting-edge defense projects. Dr. Tournear and General Guetlein’s firsthand look at these evolving assets, and staying up with them, really keeps our capabilities in focus.”
“The greater Grand Forks community has been extremely welcoming to Team SDA as we prepare for operations of the Proliferated Warfighter Space Architecture and strengthen our relationships in the region,”said SDA Director Derek Tournear.“The SDA Operations Center-North has been completed and will be fully operational in time to support the operations of our first Tranche 1 satellites that will launch later this summer. Additionally, our new Technology Acceleration Center is progressing. Once complete it will serve as a satellite support facility to onboard future tranches and as an operating location for future advanced satellite capabilities.”
“We are thrilled for this opportunity to strengthen our relationships with the U.S. Space Force and the Space Development Agency,” said UND President Andy Armacost.“As a University, one of our missions is to support these tremendous organizations by producing a highly educated workforce and creating innovations through research that enhance their missions. We want to thank Senator Cramer for making it possible for Director Tournear and General Guetlein to tour our campus and to see first-hand what the University of North Dakota has to offer.”
The group will host a media availability on Monday, April 21 at 4:15 p.m. CT in the Robin Hall Atrium, 4275 University Ave, Grand Forks, ND 58202.
Tech giant Google has just suffered another legal blow in the United States, losing a landmark antitrust case. This follows on from the company’s loss in a similar case last year.
Social media giant Meta is also currently embroiled in a landmark legal battle in the US that could change not only how it operates, but how millions of people around the world communicate.
Hearings in the Meta case commenced earlier this week in a court in Washington DC, after Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg failed to settle the case for US$450 million. Brought by the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the suit alleges Meta broke antitrust laws and illegally secured a monopoly over social media platforms.
Along with Google and Meta, Amazon and Apple are also currently facing significant antitrust challenges in the US.
All of these actions are continuing despite major changes in both the FTC and the US Department of Justice as a result of the election of Donald Trump.
Collectively, these cases represent a substantial regulatory push to examine and potentially curb the market power of big tech. So what are all of these cases about exactly? What are the next steps in each of them? And what might they mean for consumers?
The cases against Google
The case Google just lost was related to online advertising.
The US Department of Justice alleged Google had behaved anticompetitively to monopolise the complex digital advertising technology market. This market facilitates the buying and selling of online ads.
The US district judge, Leonie Brinkema, agreed Google has a monopoly over the tools used by online publishers to host ad space, and the software that facilitates transactions between online publishers and advertisers.
In her ruling, Judge Brinkema said Google had “wilfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts” which ultimately resulted in it obtaining “monopoly power in the open-web display publisher ad server market”.
Google has said it will appeal the decision. The Department of Justice will ask the court to require Google to divest parts of its ad tech business when the remedies phase of this trial starts later this month.
The second case involving Google is related to internet search.
The Department of Justice argued Google used exclusionary agreements, such as paying Apple billions annually to be the default search engine on iPhones, to lock out competitors.
The case has now moved to the remedies phase. A crucial remedies trial is scheduled to begin next week. During this, the court will hear arguments on what actions should be taken against Google. Potential remedies could be significant, with regulators previously suggesting measures such as restrictions on Google’s Android operating system or even forcing the sale of its Chrome browser.
Google has stated its intention to appeal this ruling as well.
The core of the FTC’s argument is that Meta employed a “buy-or-bury” strategy to eliminate competitive threats.
This allegedly involved acquiring nascent rivals, most notably Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014, specifically to neutralise them before they could challenge Facebook’s dominance.
The FTC points to internal communications as evidence of anticompetitive intent. These include Mark Zuckerberg’s statement, “It is better to buy than compete”. They also include an internal memo which showed Zuckerberg considered spinning off Instagram in 2018 over concerns about antitrust scrutiny.
The commission argues Meta’s actions stifled innovation and harmed consumers by limiting choices. It’s seeking to force Meta to divest, or sell off, both Instagram and WhatsApp.
Meta vigorously defends its actions. It argues it does not hold a monopoly, facing fierce competition from platforms such as TikTok, YouTube and X (formerly Twitter).
The company contends the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp were pro-competitive, allowing Meta to invest billions to improve and scale the apps, ultimately benefiting users. A key defence point is that the FTC itself reviewed and approved both deals over a decade ago.
The trial is expected to last eight weeks.
The cases against Apple and Amazon
In March 2024, the Department of Justice, along with several states, sued Apple, alleging it illegally maintains a monopoly in the smartphone market.
The lawsuit claims Apple uses its control over the iPhone ecosystem to stifle competition and innovation by, for example, degrading messaging quality between iPhones and Android devices and limiting the functionality of third-party digital wallets and smartwatches.
Apple filed a motion to dismiss the case in August 2024. The litigation is in its early stages and is expected to continue for several years.
In September 2023, the FTC, joined by numerous states, also sued Amazon.
The lawsuit alleges the tech giant unlawfully maintains monopoly power in both the market for “online superstores” (where consumers shop) and “online marketplace services” (for third-party sellers).
The FTC claims Amazon uses interlocking anticompetitive tactics. These include punishing sellers for offering lower prices elsewhere, coercing sellers into using its services, degrading search results with excessive ads, and charging exorbitant seller fees.
In late 2024, the presiding judge largely denied Amazon’s attempt to dismiss the core federal claims, allowing the case to proceed.
Taken together, these lawsuits represent the most significant antitrust enforcement push against major technology firms in the US in decades. They signal a fundamental re-examination of how competition laws apply to fast-evolving digital platforms and ecosystems.
The outcomes could potentially lead to major structural changes. These changes could include the forced breakup of companies such as Meta, or significant behavioural remedies restricting how these firms operate.
Regardless of the specific results, the decisions in these cases will likely set crucial legal precedents. In turn, these will profoundly shape the future competitive landscape for technology. They will also likely influence regulation globally, and impact innovation and investment across the digital economy.
What the cases do not reflect is the change in independence of regulatory bodies in the US, where consistency with White House policy is now paramount. The outcomes will surely test the relationship between Trump and the “tech bros” who’ve, quite literally, been at his side recently.
Rob Nicholls is a member of the Sydney University Centre for AI, Trust, and Governance and also receives funding from the Australian Research Council.
A team of astronomers announced on April 16, 2025, that in the process of studying a planet around another star, they had found evidence for an unexpected atmospheric gas. On Earth, that gas – called dimethyl sulfide – is mostly produced by living organisms.
In April 2024, the James Webb Space Telescope stared at the host star of the planet K2-18b for nearly six hours. During that time, the orbiting planet passed in front of the star. Starlight filtered through its atmosphere, carrying the fingerprints of atmospheric molecules to the telescope.
JWST’s cameras can detect molecules in the atmosphere of a planet by looking at light that passed through that atmosphere. European Space Agency
By comparing those fingerprints to 20 different molecules that they would potentially expect to observe in the atmosphere, the astronomers concluded that the most probable match was a gas that, on Earth, is a good indicator of life.
I am an astronomer and astrobiologist who studies planets around other stars and their atmospheres. In my work, I try to understand which nearby planets may be suitable for life.
K2-18b, a mysterious world
To understand what this discovery means, let’s start with the bizarre world it was found in. The planet’s name is K2-18b, meaning it is the first planet in the 18th planetary system found by the extended NASA Kepler mission, K2. Astronomers assign the “b” label to the first planet in the system, not “a,” to avoid possible confusion with the star.
K2-18b is a little over 120 light-years from Earth – on a galactic scale, this world is practically in our backyard.
Although astronomers know very little about K2-18b, we do know that it is very unlike Earth. To start, it is about eight times more massive than Earth, and it has a volume that’s about 18 times larger. This means that it’s only about half as dense as Earth. In other words, it must have a lot of water, which isn’t very dense, or a very big atmosphere, which is even less dense.
Astronomers think that this world could either be a smaller version of our solar system’s ice giant Neptune, called a mini-Neptune, or perhaps a rocky planet with no water but a massive hydrogen atmosphere, called a gas dwarf.
That term means hydrogen-over-ocean, since astronomers predict that hycean worlds are planets with global oceans many times deeper than Earth’s oceans, and without any continents. These oceans are covered by massive hydrogen atmospheres that are thousands of miles high.
Astronomers do not know yet for certain that hycean worlds exist, but models for what those would look like match the limited data JWST and other telescopes have collected on K2-18b.
This is where the story becomes exciting. Mini-Neptunes and gas dwarfs are unlikely to be hospitable for life, because they probably don’t have liquid water, and their interior surfaces have enormous pressures. But a hycean planet would have a large and likely temperate ocean. So could the oceans of hycean worlds be habitable – or even inhabited?
They found evidence for the presence of two simple carbon-bearing molecules – carbon monoxide and methane – and showed that the planet’s upper atmosphere lacked water vapor. This atmospheric composition supported, but did not prove, the idea that K2-18b could be a hycean world. In a hycean world, water would be trapped in the deeper and warmer atmosphere, closer to the oceans than the upper atmosphere probed by JWST observations.
Intriguingly, the data also showed an additional, very weak signal. The team found that this weak signal matched a gas called dimethyl sulfide, or DMS. On Earth, DMS is produced in large quantities by marine algae. It has very few, if any, nonbiological sources.
This signal made the initial detection exciting: on a planet that may have a massive ocean, there is likely a gas that is, on Earth, emitted by biological organisms.
Scientists had a mixed response to this initial announcement. While the findings were exciting, some astronomers pointed out that the DMS signal seen was weak and that the hycean nature of K2-18b is very uncertain.
To address these concerns, Mashusudhan’s team turned JWST back to K2-18b a year later. This time, they used another camera on JWST that looks for another range of wavelengths of light. The new results – announced on April 16, 2025 – supported their initial findings.
These new data show a stronger – but still relatively weak – signal that the team attributes to DMS or a very similar molecule. The fact that the DMS signal showed up on another camera during another set of observations made the interpretation of DMS in the atmosphere stronger.
Madhusudhan’s team also presented a very detailed analysis of the uncertainties in the data and interpretation. In real-life measurements, there are always some uncertainties. They found that these uncertainties are unlikely to account for the signal in the data, further supporting the DMS interpretation. As an astronomer, I find that analysis exciting.
Is life out there?
Does this mean that scientists have found life on another world? Perhaps – but we still cannot be sure.
First, does K2-18b really have an ocean deep beneath its thick atmosphere? Astronomers should test this.
Second, is the signal seen in two cameras two years apart really from dimethyl sulfide? Scientists will need more sensitive measurements and more observations of the planet’s atmosphere to be sure.
Third, if it is indeed DMS, does this mean that there is life? This may be the most difficult question to answer. Life itself is not detectable with existing technology. Astronomers will need to evaluate and exclude all other potential options to build their confidence in this possibility.
The new measurements may lead researchers toward a historic discovery. However, important uncertainties remain. Astrobiologists will need a much deeper understanding of K2-18b and similar worlds before they can be confident in the presence of DMS and its interpretation as a signature of life.
Scientists around the world are already scrutinizing the published study and will work on new tests of the findings, since independent verification is at the heart of science.
Moving forward, K2-18b is going to be an important target for JWST, the world’s most sensitive telescope. JWST may soon observe other potential hycean worlds to see if the signal appears in the atmospheres of those planets, too.
With more data, these tentative conclusions may not stand the test of time. But for now, just the prospect that astronomers may have detected gasses emitted by an alien ecosystem that bubbled up in a dark, blue-hued alien ocean is an incredibly fascinating possibility.
Regardless of the true nature of K2-18b, the new results show how using the JWST to survey other worlds for clues of alien life will guarantee that the next years will be thrilling for astrobiologists.
Daniel Apai receives funding for astrobiology research from NASA, the Heising-Simons Foundation, and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.
RESTORING ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE: Today, President Donald J. Trump’s Office of Personnel Management (OPM) took action to implement President Trump’s Executive Action titled “Restoring Accountability to Policy-Influencing Positions Within the Federal Workforce.”
OPM proposed a rule to amend the civil service regulations to include Schedule Policy/Career for career employees with important policy-determining, policy-making, policy-advocating, or confidential duties.
These employees will serve as at-will employees, without access to cumbersome adverse action procedures or appeals, overturning Biden Administration regulations that protected poor performing employees.
Line federal employees who implement those policies, like Border Patrol agents or wage and hour inspectors, will generally be excluded.
This rule empowers federal agencies to swiftly remove employees in policy-influencing roles for poor performance, misconduct, corruption, or subversion of Presidential directives, without lengthy procedural hurdles.
Schedule Policy/Career positions remain career positions, filled through existing nonpartisan, merit-based hiring processes.
These employees will keep their competitive status and are not required to personally or politically support the President, but must faithfully implement the law and the administration’s policies.
OPM estimates 50,000 positions will ultimately be moved into Schedule Policy/Career, approximately 2% of the Federal workforce.
The proposed rule does not directly move positions into Schedule Policy/Career. That will be done by a subsequent executive order after a final rule issues.
FIXING A BROKEN SYSTEM: The proposed rule tackles systemic issues in federal workforce accountability, addressing unaccountable, policy-determining federal employees who put their own interests ahead of the American people’s.
Federal employees report their agencies do not hold employees accountable:
The Merit Principles Survey shows less than a quarter of federal employees believe their agencies address poor performers effectively.
When asked what typically happens to poor performers in their work unit, federal employees’ most common response is they “remain in the work unit and continue to underperform.”
This happens because the process for removing federal employees is lengthy and difficult:
The Government Accountability Office reports it takes 6 months to a year to remove poor performers, even before appeals.
Only two-fifths of federal managers are confident they could remove employees who committed serious misconduct.
Just one-quarter believe they could remove an employee for poor performance in a critical element of their job.
Unaccountability allows corruption to fester in agencies:
For example, a recent audit of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) found widespread misconduct by senior leaders, such as male supervisors pressuring female subordinates for sexual favors in exchange for career assistance.
The FDIC almost never seriously disciplined employees for such corrupt behavior. Not a single complaint to the agency’s Anti-Harassment program resulted in a removal, or even a demotion.
The auditors found the FDIC tolerated misconduct because the removal process was too difficult to use.
Some bureaucrats also use the protections the system gives them to oppose presidential policies and impose their own preferences:
Recent polling asked senior federal employees in Washington, D.C., what they would do if the President gave them a lawful order they considered bad policy. A plurality said they would ignore the order and do what they thought best.
During the first Trump administration career attorneys in the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division would not assist in litigation charging Yale University with racially discriminating against Asian and Caucasian applicants.
In the President’s first term, career employees in the Department of Education would not constructively assist in drafting major rules like the Title IX rules.
An Equal Employment Opportunity Commission administrative judge (AJ) recently sent an agency-wide email stating that the agency’s Acting Chair (who was appointed by President Trump) was “not fit to be our chair much less hold a license to practice law” and that the AJ would not implement President Trump’s Executive Orders.
Unaccountable bureaucracy undermines democracy. For the government to be accountable to the American people, elected officials must be able to hold policy-determining and policy-making career employees accountable for their performance and conduct.
DRAINING THE SWAMP: President Trump is delivering on his promise to dismantle the deep state and reclaim our government from Washington corruption.
In his first term, President Trump signed an Executive Order to reclassify certain federal workers in policy-related roles as “Schedule F” employees, enabling swift accountability for those in influential positions.
When President Biden took office, he revoked this Executive Order, reinstating protections that shielded unaccountable bureaucrats.
President Trump vowed on the campaign trail to reinstate this Executive Order, a promise he kept on his first day returning to office.
ALBUQUERQUE – Ryan Ellison has been appointed as the United States Attorney for the District of New Mexico by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi. Mr. Ellison was sworn in by United States District Judge Margaret Strickland on April 18, 2025.
“I am grateful for the opportunity to serve the people of New Mexico in this role,” said Mr. Ellison. “For however long I serve as United States Attorney, my primary objective will be to keep New Mexicans safe through the vigorous enforcement of Federal law. Under my leadership, the United States Attorney’s Office will do its part to stem the unlawful flow of people and drugs into our country. We will also not lose sight of our responsibility to combat violent crime, gang activity, child predators, and to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States’ civil interests. Together with our federal, tribal, state, and local law enforcement partners, the United States Attorney’s Office will work tirelessly to make New Mexico a safer place to live, work, raise a family, and run a business. And we will make New Mexico a far less attractive place to commit a crime.”
Mr. Ellison, born and raised in Alamogordo, New Mexico, graduated from the University of Arizona with a business degree in 2010. He earned his Juris Doctor and MBA from Texas Tech University in 2013. Since 2018, Mr. Ellison has served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of New Mexico in the Las Cruces Branch Office, most recently as Supervisory Assistant U.S. Attorney of the Violent and General Crimes Section.
As an Assistant U.S. Attorney, Mr. Ellison prosecuted members of the Syndicato de Nuevo Mexico (“SNM”) prison gang. To date, more than 175 SNM gang members and associates have been charged with serious federal crimes, making the ongoing SNM prosecution the largest criminal case ever brought in the District of New Mexico. He has also investigated and prosecuted other violent crimes, including VICAR murder, RICO conspiracy, carjacking resulting in death, kidnapping resulting in death, murder-for-hire, and various firearms, immigration, and national security offenses.
Prior to joining the Department of Justice, Mr. Ellison worked as an Assistant District Attorney in the 47th Judicial District Attorney’s Office in Texas and as an associate attorney in private practice.
As U.S. Attorney, Mr. Ellison will be responsible for overseeing federal criminal prosecutions and civil litigation involving the United States in the District of New Mexico. Ellison leads a dedicated team of over 150 prosecutors and support professionals with offices located in Albuquerque and Las Cruces. The District of New Mexico encompasses 33 counties and shares a 180-mile international border with Mexico. It is home to five National Forests, four major military installations, two National Laboratories, 19 pueblos, two Apache tribes, and one-third of the Navajo Nation.
Source: United States Senator for Maine Susan Collins
Click HERE, HERE, or HERE for individual photos
Orono, ME – Today, U.S. Senator Susan Collins delivered remarks at the inaugural Patricia M. and Donald F. Collins Leadership Award ceremony at the University of Maine (UMaine). This endowed scholarship award was established in memory of Patricia and Donald Collins, both Class of 1949 graduates of UMaine, former mayors of the City of Caribou, and the parents of six children, including Senator Collins. Patricia Collins also served as the first female chair of the UMaine System Board of Trustees, the Catholic Charities of Maine Board of Directors, and the Catholic Foundation of Maine Board of Trustees. Donald Collins was a Bronze Star and two-time Purple Heart recipient as an infantry sergeant during the Battle of the Bulge in World War II, and later served as a member of the Maine State House of Representatives and the Maine State Senate.
The inaugural recipient of the award is Keegan Tripp, a member of the University of Maine Class of 2026. Keegan is the President of the University of Maine Student Government, a board member of the University of Maine Alumni Association, and a recipient of the John M. Nickerson Scholarship for political science students who have demonstrated exceptional academic achievement. Keegan also interned at Senator Collins’ state office in Bangor.
“My parents believed deeply in the value of education, civic responsibility, and giving back to their community, and they exemplified those principles throughout their lives,” said Senator Collins. “It is incredibly meaningful to honor their legacy through this endowed scholarship. I know that they too would be proud of Keegan, whose leadership, character, and outstanding academic achievements made him an excellent candidate to be the first-ever recipient of this award.”
ECF 2024 Quadchart Yang.pdf Shuolong Yang University of Chicago This effort will leverage the latest developments in superconductors to build a power transmission cable that can operate in the extreme cold temperatures found on the Moon with very low electrical losses. The team will use novel manufacturing techniques to grow alternating layers of FeSe SrTiO3 films onto a substrate and the resulting, superconducting tape can be fashioned into electrical transmission lines. The project will culminate with a demonstration 1-meter-long superconducting transmission line which supports 1 amp of power transmission at 1,000 volts. Back to ECF 2024 Full List
ECF 2024 Quadchart Boles.pdf Jessica Boles University of California, Berkeley This project will develop piezoelectric-based power conversion for small power systems on the lunar surface. These piezoelectric systems can potentially offer high power density to significantly reduce size, weight, and cost. They can also offer high efficiency as well as resistance to the extreme lunar environment with its expected prolonged exposure to extreme cold and radiation. The effort will build and test prototype piezoelectric DC-to-DC power converters and DC-to-DC power supplies. Back to ECF 2024 Full List
ECF 2024 Quadchart Arya.pdf Manan Arya Stanford University This grant will design and develop lightweight, low-cost modular solar reflectors that can be stowed for transport in a compact volume. These reflectors can potentially be used to reflect and concentrate sunlight into a permanently shadowed area of the Moon where it could power photovoltaics. These reflectors could also potentially be used for concentrated photovoltaics for deep-space missions, solar thermal propulsion, or for thermal mining. The team will use recently developed origami design algorithms to allow for compact and reversible stowage of paraboloidal shell structures without any cuts or slits. Back to ECF 2024 Full List
ECF 2024 Quadchart Underwood.pdf Thomas Underwood University of Texas, Austin This project will demonstrate a fusion propulsion system based on z-pinch which is a method of compressing plasma by running electrical current though it. The z-pinch will compress and heat the plasma to produce fusion reactions, and the system will be paired with an electromagnetic accelerator to produce thrust from these reactions. The effort intends to design, build, and test a prototype device and use computational modeling to evaluate the potential performance of larger systems which would be suitable for powering deep-space missions. Back to ECF 2024 Full List
ECF 2024 Quadchart Oguri.pdf Kenshiro Oguri Purdue University This project will investigate one of the key fundamental challenges associated with directed-energy light-sailing technology, similar to solar sails but powered by a laser beam pointed at the sail instead of by the sun. The effort will first mathematically model, then design, build, and test a prototype diffractive light sail. The three-dimensional, origami-inspired light sail could potentially unlock higher thrust, passive beam riding stability, and higher maneuverability via its ability to transform its shape. Back to ECF 2024 Full List
ECF 2024 Quadchart Ilic.pdf Ognjen Ilic University of Minnesota This effort will aim to demonstrate the feasibility of directed-energy propulsion through a combination of computational simulations and prototype testing. The project will model the interactions between lightsail material and a laser beam that can be pointed at the sail to propel the spacecraft. The results of the modeling will be used to fabricate an optimized sail for testing with a 30W laser. A successful demonstration would pave the way for ultrafast spaceflight within and beyond the solar system. Back to ECF 2024 Full List
As part of ESA/Hubble’s 35th anniversary celebrations, the European Space Agency (ESA) is sharing a new image series revisiting stunning, previously released Hubble targets with the addition of the latest Hubble data and new processing techniques. New images of NGC 346 and the Sombrero Galaxy have already been published. Now, ESA/Hubble is revisiting the Eagle Nebula (originally published in 2005 as part of Hubble’s 15th anniversary celebrations) with new image processing techniques. Unfurling along the length of the image is a pillar of cold gas and dust that is 9.5 light-years tall. As enormous as this dusty pillar is, it’s just one small piece of the greater Eagle Nebula, also called Messier 16. The name Messier 16 comes from the French astronomer Charles Messier, a comet hunter who compiled a catalog of deep-sky objects that could be mistaken for comets.
This NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope image features a towering structure of billowing gas in the Eagle Nebula (Messier 16). The pillar rises 9.5 light-years tall and is 7,000 light-years away from Earth. ESA/Hubble & NASA, K. Noll
The name Eagle Nebula was inspired by the nebula’s appearance. The edge of this shining nebula is shaped by dark clouds like this one, giving it the appearance of an eagle spreading its wings.Not too far from the region pictured here are the famous Pillars of Creation, which Hubble photographed multiple times, with images released in 1995 and 2015. The heart of the nebula, which is located beyond the edge of this image, is home to a cluster of young stars. These stars have excavated an immense cavity in the center of the nebula, shaping otherworldly pillars and globules of dusty gas. This particular feature extends like a pointing finger toward the center of the nebula and the rich young star cluster embedded there. The Eagle Nebula is one of many nebulae in the Milky Way that are known for their sculpted, dusty clouds. Nebulae take on these fantastic shapes when exposed to powerful radiation and winds from infant stars. Regions with denser gas are more able to withstand the onslaught of radiation and stellar winds from young stars, and these dense areas remain as dusty sculptures like the starry pillar shown here.
[embedded content] This towering structure of billowing gas and dark, obscuring dust might only be a small portion of the Eagle Nebula, but it is no less majestic in appearance for it. 9.5 light-years tall and 7000 light-years distant from Earth, this dusty sculpture is refreshed with the use of new processing techniques. The new Hubble image is part of ESA/Hubble’s 35th anniversary celebrations. Credit: ESA/Hubble & NASA, K. Noll, N. Bartmann (ESA/Hubble); Music: Stellardrone – Ascent
The Hubble Space Telescope has been operating for over three decades and continues to make ground-breaking discoveries that shape our fundamental understanding of the universe. Hubble is a project of international cooperation between NASA and ESA (European Space Agency). NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, manages the telescope and mission operations. Lockheed Martin Space, based in Denver, also supports mission operations at Goddard. The Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, conducts Hubble science operations for NASA.
Lt. Gov. Austin Davis, Department of Aging Announce New Initiative to Make the Commonwealth Friendlier, More Welcoming for Older Adults
Lt. Gov. Austin Davis joined Department of Aging Secretary Jason Kavulich and local leaders today to kick off the first in a series of events across the Commonwealth to highlight efforts to develop age-friendly communities – all with the goal of encouraging more cities, towns and neighborhoods in the Commonwealth to ensure older Pennsylvanians have the services and support they need to thrive at every stage of life.
“Older adults in Allegheny County and here in my hometown of McKeesport are the backbone of our communities. They are our family, friends, and neighbors who have made great contributions in our lives that benefit all of us,” said Lt. Gov. Davis. “The organizers of age-friendly communities here in southwest Pennsylvania are making a positive impact, and I applaud their work and dedication as we welcome new faces to the table to expand these initiatives.”
INVITED SPEAKERS Lt. Gov. Austin Davis Secretary of Aging Jason Kavulich Congresswoman Summer Lee Senator Nick Pisciottano Rich Fitzgerald, executive director, Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission Mary Esther Van Shura, AARP executive council member Paul Winkler, Southwest PA Partnership for Aging board member Dr. Megan Nagel, Penn State regional chancellor Dr. Elizabeth Farmer, dean, University of Pittsburgh School of Social Work Laura Poskin, executive director, Age-Friendly Greater Pittsburgh
Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
April 18, 2025
State Dept memo reportedly reveals contradictions in Trump Administration’s rationale for revocation of Öztürk’s visa, detention
Text of Letter (PDF)
Washington, D.C. – After a recent report indicated that an internal State Department memo concluded that the key premise underlying Tufts graduate student Rümeysa Öztürk’s arrest and detention was false, U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), pressed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to immediately release the memo and any other relevant documentation.
“Ms. Öztürk’s case demands transparency. The circumstances of her arrest and detention raise serious concerns about civil liberties, academic freedom, and free speech, as well as the Trump administration’s truthfulness. Congress, universities, legal experts, and other members of the public have a strong and compelling interest in the matter,” wrote the lawmakers.
On March 25th, plainclothes U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents apprehended Rümeysa Öztürk outside her home in Somerville, Massachusetts. Ms. Öztürk, a Tufts University graduate student, was informed that her student visa had been revoked. She was taken into custody and transferred to an immigration detention facility in Louisiana, where she has now been held for three weeks.
Publicly, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has claimed that Ms. Öztürk “engaged in activities in support of Hamas” and recommended revoking her visa under a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that permits the deportation of noncitizens who pose “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.” The State Department has suggested that Öztürk’s visa was revoked on foreign-policy grounds because of alleged participation in activities linked to terrorism.
Reporting from the Washington Post revealed that, days before Öztürk’s arrest, an internal State Department memorandum concluded that the Trump administration lacked “any evidence showing that she engaged in antisemitic activities or made public statements supporting a terrorist organization.” The memo appears to contradict the federal government’s publicly stated rationale for revoking Ms. Öztürk’s visa — and has not been made available to members of Congress or the American public.
The lawmakers requested a copy of the memo, along with any other documentation regarding the basis for Öztürk’s visa revocation and arrest, no later than April 30, 2025.
Sens. Warren and Markey, along with Rep. Pressley, have pushed for answers and action since Öztürk’s March arrest. Last month, they led over 30 lawmakers in writing to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Acting Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Todd Lyons, demanding information about Öztürk’s arrest and detention as well as similar incidents across the country. The lawmakers also sounded the alarm on Öztürk’s medical neglect in DHS custody and renewed urgent calls for her release.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (MA-07)
State Dept memo reportedly reveals contradictions in Trump Administration’s rationale for revocation of Öztürk’s visa, detention
Text of Letter (PDF)
WASHINGTON – After a recent report indicated that an internal State Department memo concluded that the key premise underlying Tufts graduate student Rümeysa Öztürk’s arrest and detention was false, Representative Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) and Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Ed Markey (D-MA) pressed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to immediately release the memo and any other relevant documentation. Last month, Pressley, Markey, and Warren led over 30 lawmakers in writing to Trump Administration officials demanding information about Rümeysa’s arrest and detention, and similar incidents across the country.
“Ms. Öztürk’s case demands transparency. The circumstances of her arrest and detention raise serious concerns about civil liberties, academic freedom, and free speech, as well as the Trump administration’s truthfulness. Congress, universities, legal experts, and other members of the public have a strong and compelling interest in the matter,” wrote the lawmakers.
On March 25th, plainclothes U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents apprehended Rümeysa Öztürk outside her home in Somerville, Massachusetts. Ms. Öztürk, a Tufts University graduate student, was informed that her student visa had been revoked. She was taken into custody and transferred to an immigration detention facility in Louisiana, where she has now been held for three weeks.
Publicly, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has claimed that Ms. Öztürk “engaged in activities in support of Hamas” and recommended revoking her visa under a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that permits the deportation of noncitizens who pose “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.” The State Department has suggested that Öztürk’s visa was revoked on foreign-policy grounds because of alleged participation in activities linked to terrorism.
Reporting from the Washington Post revealed that, days before Öztürk’s arrest, an internal State Department memorandum concluded that the Trump administration lacked “any evidence showing that she engaged in antisemitic activities or made public statements supporting a terrorist organization.” The memo appears to contradict the federal government’s publicly
stated rationale for revoking Ms. Öztürk’s visa — and has not been made available to members of Congress or the American public.
The lawmakers requested a copy of the memo, along with any other documentation regarding the basis for Öztürk’s visa revocation and arrest, no later than April 30, 2025.
Rep. Pressley, along with Sens. Warren and Markey, have pushed for answers and action since Öztürk’s March arrest. Last month, they led over 30 lawmakers in writing to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Acting Director for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Todd Lyons, demanding information about Öztürk’s arrest and detention as well as similar incidents across the country. The lawmakers also sounded the alarm on Öztürk’s medical neglect in DHS custody and renewed urgent calls for her release.
Last month, Congresswoman Pressley issued a statement condemning reports that ICE arrested and detained Rümeysa Öztürk. Earlier that week, Rep. Pressley issued a statement following reports of ICE activity in Boston and other municipalities in Massachusetts.
WASHINGTON – Florida State University experienced an active shooter event, which resulted in the deaths of two individuals and injuries to five others.
NEA President Becky Pringle issued the following statement.
“We stand with the Florida State University community. To every person feeling the weight of this moment: you are not alone. A campus, any campus across America, should be a place of safety, learning, and belonging—not violence and fear.
“Florida students deserve better. Our communities across the country deserve better. This is the third shooting in three days affecting our students—first Dallas and San Antonio, now Tallahassee. Shame on politicians for protecting the gun lobby instead of students, and for failing to address the epidemic of gun violence sweeping across this country. We are past time for our elected leaders to take real action to end this senseless gun violence.”
NEA Resources:Gun Violence Prevention and Response.
Follow us on Bluesky at https://bsky.app/profile/neapresident.bsky.social & https://bsky.app/profile/neatoday.bsky.social
# # #
The National Education Association is the nation’s largest professional employee organization, representing more than 3 million elementary and secondary teachers, higher education faculty, education support professionals, school administrators, retired educators, students preparing to become teachers, healthcare workers, and public employees. Learn more at www.nea.org.
Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
PHOTOS
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) convened a roundtable conversation with local educators to discuss his efforts to support students and teachers amidst Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s attacks on public education and our children’s futures.
“Public education is the foundation for functional democracy,” said Heinrich during the roundtable. “The message of disrespect that Trump and Musk are sending by creating all of this chaos with the Department of Education hurts our teachers and it jeopardizes our kids’ futures. I am deeply grateful for the work that New Mexico educators do, and will continue to push back against efforts to dismantle our education system with every tool available.”
As a father and as New Mexico’s senior senator, Heinrich has been leading the fight against the Trump Administration’s attacks on public education. Heinrich led the charge in Congress to demand Trump reverse his attacks on Tribal education and immediately halt, exempt, and reverse any federal workforce or federal funding reductions at Tribal Colleges and Universities.
Heinrich has also demanded the reinstatement of $600 million in federal funding intended to strengthen our educator workforce and improve student learning; underscored the disastrous harm that shuttering the Department of Education will have on millions of students with disabilities and their families; and introduced legislation to protect federal education funding for New Mexico’s students, parents, and educators.
For a detailed timeline and background of Heinrich’s efforts to fight against Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s attacks on public education and our children’s future, click here.
Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
PHOTOS
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) convened a roundtable conversation with local educators to discuss his efforts to support students and teachers amidst Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s attacks on public education and our children’s futures.
“Public education is the foundation for functional democracy,” said Heinrich during the roundtable. “The message of disrespect that Trump and Musk are sending by creating all of this chaos with the Department of Education hurts our teachers and it jeopardizes our kids’ futures. I am deeply grateful for the work that New Mexico educators do, and will continue to push back against efforts to dismantle our education system with every tool available.”
As a father and as New Mexico’s senior senator, Heinrich has been leading the fight against the Trump Administration’s attacks on public education. Heinrich led the charge in Congress to demand Trump reverse his attacks on Tribal education and immediately halt, exempt, and reverse any federal workforce or federal funding reductions at Tribal Colleges and Universities.
Heinrich has also demanded the reinstatement of $600 million in federal funding intended to strengthen our educator workforce and improve student learning; underscored the disastrous harm that shuttering the Department of Education will have on millions of students with disabilities and their families; and introduced legislation to protect federal education funding for New Mexico’s students, parents, and educators.
For a detailed timeline and background of Heinrich’s efforts to fight against Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s attacks on public education and our children’s future, click here.
Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –
The traditional Donor Day was held at the State University of Management.
Dozens of children came to donate blood to give a chance for recovery to those who especially need it.
The traditional voluntary action of the State University of Management to collect donor blood has been held at our university since 2013.
Before the break due to safety measures during the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic, the event was held twice a year and consistently attracted between 50 and 200 people at different times.
Since the pandemic, the campaign has been held once a year, excluding extraordinary collections related to emergency situations.
GUU thanks everyone who responded on this day. Together we helped people who vitally needed it!
Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 04/18/2025
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –
On April 18, 2025, the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation announced the winners of the first competition of student design bureaus, including the State University of Management.
“Today, there are 676 student design bureaus in Russia, which employ more than 100 thousand students, postgraduates and young scientists. They have the opportunity to design their own solutions, register patents for inventions in priority areas of scientific and technological development, and also decide on employment,” said Deputy Prime Minister of Russia Dmitry Chernyshenko.
The competition was held in two areas: “Student Design Leadership” and “Creation and Development of a Student Design Bureau”. The winners will receive grants of 20 and 5 million rubles, respectively.
178 applications from 101 cities in 81 regions of Russia were submitted to the selection round. 115 of them passed the expert assessment. 30 made it to the finals for in-person defense. 15 successfully defended and won grants.
“The Interuniversity Student Design Bureau of the State University of Management has been accepting and successfully fulfilling orders for several years now. One of our main customers is the leading engineering center of Russia in the field of transport engineering “TMH Engineering”. At the same time, GUU is the head university of the design bureau and not only carries out complex technological work, but also manages the system of commands from other universities,” said GUU Rector Vladimir Stroyev.
The State University of Management won in the category “Creation and development of a student design bureau” and will receive a grant of 5 million rubles for the creation of new and development of existing sites, including the purchase of modern equipment.
The areas of activity of the selected design bureaus cover key strategic areas for the country – unmanned systems, robotics, microelectronics, prototyping, cybersecurity, reverse engineering, electronics and electrical engineering, VR technologies, computer modeling and design, mechanical engineering and instrument making, bioengineering systems, engine building, nuclear and energy technologies, materials science, space technology, ground transport systems.
We congratulate our scientists on their victory and wish them further development of the inter-university design bureau and interesting orders!
Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 04/18/2025
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
GUANGZHOU, April 18 — In spite of intensified trade protectionism and geopolitical tensions, China’s products and market are still appealing to foreign business people.
A record-breaking 65 Fortune Global 500 companies and industry leaders are participating in the ongoing fifth China International Consumer Products Expo (CICPE) in the tropical island province of Hainan in south China.
Meanwhile, the Canton Fair, which kicked off on Tuesday in Guangzhou, south China, drew 64,530 overseas buyers on its opening day, an 8.9 percent year-on-year increase and a record high for the first day. This event in Guangdong Province features major international retailers, including Walmart and Target from the United States, Carrefour from France, Tesco and Kingfisher from the UK, and Germany’s Metro.
According to Niu Huayong, a professor at the International Business School of Beijing Foreign Studies University, the success of this year’s CICPE and Canton Fair highlights that trade and cooperation remain key drivers of global development. All countries benefit from globalization, he said.
Amid current global trade turbulence, international buyers attending the Canton Fair still consider Chinese products highly attractive and even irreplaceable.
Dinova, a retail company headquartered in France which finds most of its suppliers at the Canton Fair, has made China the core of its global sourcing strategy, according to its general manager Sonia Ben Behe.
“We have explored alternative countries, but no other region matches China’s maturity for our product category. That’s why, as part of a global sourcing strategy, China remains at the core,” she said.
According to Chris Arthan, an exhibitor from the United States, despite the impact of tariffs, China’s role in the global supply chain remains crucial and widely respected.
In addition to the strong appeal of Chinese products to global buyers, international brands also have confidence in China’s consumer market. For this year’s CICPE, top producers from around the world eagerly flocked to Hainan.
The UK, as the guest country of honor at the 2025 event, is occupying an exhibition area of more than 1,300 square meters, displaying 53 brands across the fashion, beauty, homeware, health and jewelry industries, and doubling its 2024 presence.
“I have seen the tremendous innovation and growth taking place within China’s economy in recent years, not least in digital technologies, life sciences and green energy,” said Douglas Alexander, minister of state of the British Department for Business and Trade, while also emphasizing the UK’s commitment to deepening economic ties with China.
Notably, the expo has managed to draw an array of top-tier global luxury brands. Richemont’s TimeVallée debuted as an independent exhibitor, while LVMH and Kering Group brands made appearances — reflecting confidence in China’s premium consumption growth.
“Luxury consumers in China are significantly younger than those in many overseas markets, and that presents a major opportunity for us,” said Nancy Liu, president of luxury travel retailer DFS China. The company has introduced tailored services to cater to the expectations of emerging consumer groups.
Global trade uncertainties and growing supply chain disruptions have not prevented foreign investors from remaining optimistic about the Chinese market. China’s market size, rising consumer demand and supportive policies continue to offer unique and strong appeal, helping to retain investor confidence.
According to Yao Zhenguo, global senior vice president of Siemens Energy, the development of the Hainan Free Trade Port is unlocking new opportunities for openness. He noted that Siemens will continue to strengthen collaboration across the full industrial chain, drive innovation, and support Hainan Free Trade Port’s international, green and law-based growth.
Yao said Siemens has deeply felt the momentum of China’s reform and opening up, a view echoed by many exhibitors. They believe that amid a challenging global economic climate and rising trade protectionism, China’s firm commitment to high-standard opening up delivers much-needed stability and certainty, injecting confidence into the world economy.
China’s total goods imports and exports in yuan-denominated terms expanded 1.3 percent year on year in the first quarter of 2025, demonstrating stable growth and strong resilience despite external headwinds, customs data showed.
U.S. tariff increases on Chinese products will exert some pressure on China’s trade and economy in the short term, but won’t alter the Chinese economy’s long-term positive trajectory, said Sheng Laiyun, deputy director of the National Bureau of Statistics.
Zhang Yansheng, an economist with the Academy of Macroeconomic Research, told Xinhua that based on the trade events in Guangzhou and Hainan, the resilience of China’s foreign trade against the backdrop of growing protectionism in the world is evident. “We can see that foreign business people continue to seek opportunities in China.”
“China is a country with a large population, a big economy and a huge scale of opening up,” he continued. “At a time when the sentiment of anti-globalization grows, China will stick to the path of opening up at a high level, and promote economic globalization, as well as trade and investment liberalization.”
Suffice it to say, many artists and arts organizations across the U.S. are worried: Will government arts funding dry up? Do these cuts signal a new war on arts and culture? How do artists make it through this period of change?
As scholarswho study the arts, activism and policy, we’re watching the latest developments with apprehension. But we think it’s important to point out that while the U.S. government has never been a global leader of arts funding, American artists have always been innovative, creative and scrappy during times of political turmoil.
A rocky relationship with the arts
For much of the country’s early history, government funding for the arts was rarely guaranteed or stable.
After the Civil War, the Second Industrial Revolution facilitated massive concentrations of wealth, in what became known as the the Gilded Age. Private arts funding soared during this period, with some titans of industry, such as Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, seeing it as their duty to build museums, theaters and libraries for the public. The heavy reliance on private funding for the arts troubled some Americans, who feared these institutions would become too exposed to the whims of the wealthy.
Efforts to fund the arts expanded with the election of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932, as the country was reeling from the Great Depression. From 1935 to 1943, the Works Progress Administration provided jobs with stable wages for artists through the Federal Art Project. However, Congress famously terminated the program in response to a 1937 production of “The Revolt of the Beavers,” which conservative politicians denounced for containing overt Marxist themes.
Nonetheless, over the ensuing decades, the federal government generally signaled its support for the arts.
Congress established the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1965 to fund arts organizations and artists. And since 1972, the General Services Administration has commissioned public art for federal buildings and organized a registry of prospective artists.
The NEA gave US$8.4 million in direct funding to artists in 1989 via fellowships and grants. This might be considered the high-water mark for unrestricted government funding for individual artists.
Andres Serrano’s ‘Piss Christ’ spurred calls to restrict public funding of the arts. Fairfax Media/Getty Images
By the 1980s, sexuality, drugs and American morality had become hot-button political issues. The arts, from music to theater, were at the center of this culture war. Pressure escalated in 1989 when conservative leaders contested two NEA-funded exhibitions featuring work by Andres Serrano and Robert Mapplethorpe, which they deemed homoerotic and anti-Christian. In 1990, Congress instated a “decency clause” guiding all future NEA work. When Republicans regained control of Congress in 1994, they slashed direct funding for the arts.
With direct funding to artists largely eliminated, today’s artists can indirectly receive federal government support through federal arts agency grants, which are given to arts organizations that then dole out a portion to artists. Local and state government agencies also provide small amounts of direct support for artists.
The stage of democracy
Artists and arts organizations have a long legacy of persistence and strategic organizing during periods of political and economic upheaval.
In the pre-Revolutionary colonies, representatives of the British government banned theatrical performances to discourage revolutionary action. In response, activist playwrights organized underground parlor dramas and informal dramatic readings to keep arts-based activism alive.
These dramas, often organized by women, would take place in living rooms, outside of public view. The clandestine staged readings – the most famous of which was written by one of the earliest Black American playwrights, William Wells Brown – seeded enthusiasm and solidarity for the antislavery cause. These privately staged readings took place alongside public performances and lectures.
Supporting adult learners of all ages – but specifically young adults – they initially focused on arts-based techniques for training workers in labor activism. For example, students wrote short plays based on their experiences of factory work. In their rehearsals and performances, they imagined endings in which workers triumphed over cruel bosses.
Many programs were residential, rural and embraced early versions of mutual aid, where artists and activists support one another directly through pooling money and resources. Tuition was minimal and generally provided directly from labor organizations and allies, including the American Fund for Public Service. Most teachers were volunteers, and the learning communities often farmed to cover basic necessities.
Black artists have long created spaces for community connection and career development. The Great Migration brought many Black American artists and thinkers to New York City, famously spurring the Harlem Renaissance, which lasted from the end of World War I through the 1920s. During this period, the neighborhood became a fountain of culture, with Black artists producing countless plays, books, music and other visionary works.
This legacy continued at Just Above Midtown, or JAM, a gallery and arts laboratory led by Linda Goode Bryant from 1974 through 1986 on West 57th Street in Manhattan.
What’s more, new philanthropic models are reshaping arts funding by elevating the perspectives of artists, rather than those of wealthy funders. CAST in San Francisco helps arts organizations find affordable gallery and performance spaces. The Community and Cultural Power Fund uses a trust-based philanthropy model that allows artists and community members to decide who receives future grants. The Ruth Foundation for the Arts makes artists the decision-makers in giving grants to arts organizations.
While the current challenges are unprecedented – and funding threats will likely reshape arts organizations and further limit direct support for artists – we’re confident that the arts will persist with or without government support.
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.
Nearly every country in the world has a central bank – a public institution that manages a country’s currency and its monetary policy. And these banks have an extraordinary amount of power. By controlling the flow of money and credit in a country, they can affect economic growth, inflation, employment and financial stability.
These are powers that many politicians – including, currently, U.S. President Donald Trump – would seemingly like to control or at least manipulate. That’s because monetary policy can provide governments with economic boosts at key times, such as around elections or during periods of falling popularity.
The problem is that short-lived, politically motivated moves may be detrimental to the long-term economic well-being of a nation. They may, in other words, saddle the economy with problems further down the line.
In fact, monetary policymaking that is data-driven and technocratic, rather than politically motivated, has since the early 1990s been seen as the gold standardof governance of national finances. By and large, this arrangement, in which central bankers keep politicians at arm’s length, has achieved its main purpose: Inflation has beenrelatively low and stable in countries with independent central banks, such as Switzerland or Sweden – certainly until the pandemic and war in Europe began pushing up prices globally.
In comparison, countries such as Lebanon and Egypt, where independence was never extended, or Argentina and Turkey, where it has been curtailed, have experienced more bouts of high inflation.
As political economists, we are not surprised to see politicians try to exert influence on central banks. Monetary policy, even with independence, has always been political. For one thing, central banks remain part of the government bureaucracy, and independence granted to them can always be reversed – either by changing laws or backtracking on established practices.
If monetary policy is such a coveted policy tool, how have central banks held off politicians and stayed independent? And is this independence being eroded?
Broadly, central banks are protected by laws that offer long tenures to their leadership, allow them to focus policy primarily on inflation, and severely limit lending to the rest of the government.
Of course, such legislation cannot anticipate all future contingencies, which may open the door for political interference or for practices that break the law. And sometimes central bankers are unceremoniously fired.
However, laws do keep politicians in line. For example, even in authoritarian countries, laws protecting central banks from political interference have helped reduce inflation and restricted central bank lending to the government.
Around the world, appointments to central bank leadership are political – elected politicians select candidates based on career credentials, political affiliation and, importantly, their dislike or tolerance of inflation.
But lawmakers in different countries exercise different degrees of political control.
A 2025 study shows that the large majority of central bank leaders – about 70% – are appointed by the head of government alone or with the intervention of other members of the executive branch. This ensures that the preferences of the central bank are closer to the government’s, which can boost the central bank’s legitimacy in democratic countries, but at the risk of permeability to political influence.
Alternatively, appointments can involve the legislative power or even the central bank’s own board. In the U.S., while the president nominates members of the Federal Reserve Board, the Senate can and has rejected unconventional or incompetent candidates.
Moreover, even if appointments are political, many central bankers stay in office long after the people who appointed them have been voted out. By the end of 2023, the most common length of the governors’ appointment is five years, and in 41 countries the legal mandate was six years or longer. Powell is set to stay on as Fed chair until his term expires in 2026. The Fed chair position has traditionally been protected by law, as Powell himself acknowledged in November 2024: “We’re not removable except for cause. We serve very long terms, seemingly endless terms. So we’re protected into law. Congress could change that law, but I don’t think there’s any danger of that.” But Trump’s firing of leaders of other independent federal agencies has set up a legal challenge that could affect the Fed, too.
In the 2000s, several countries shortened the tenure of their central banks’ governors to four or five years. Sometimes, this was part of broader restrictions in central bank independence, as was the case in Iceland in 2001, Ghana in 2002 and Romania in 2004.
The low inflation objective
As of 2023, all but six central banks globally had low inflation as their main goal. Yet many central banks are required by law to try to achieve additional and sometimes conflicting goals, such as financial stability, full employment or support for the government’s policies.
This is the case for 38 central banks that either have the explicit dual mandate of price stability and employment or more complex goals. In Argentina, for example, the central bank’s mandate is to provide “employment and economic development with social equity.”
Conflicting objectives can open central banks to politicization. In the U.S. the Federal Reserve has a dual mandate of stable prices and maximum sustainable employment. These goals are often complementary, and economists have argued that low inflation is a prerequisite for sustainable high levels of employment.
Since 2000, at least 23 countries have expanded the focus of their central banks beyond just inflation.
Limits on government lending
The first central banks were created to help secure finance for governments fightingwars. But today, limiting lending to governments is at the core of protecting price stability from unsustainable fiscal spending.
History is dotted with the consequences of not doing so. In the 1960s and 1970s, for example, central banks in Latin America printed money to support their governments’ spending goals. But it resulted in massive inflation while not securing growth or political stability.
Yet over the past two decades, almost 40 countries have made their central banks less able to limit central government funding. In the more extreme examples – such as in Belarus, Ecuador or even New Zealand – they have turned the central bank into a potential financier for the government.
And since mid-2021, major central banks have struggled to keep inflation low, raising questions from populist and antidemocratic politicians about the merits of an arm’s-length relationship.
But chipping away at central bank independence, as Trump appears to be doing with his open criticism of the Fed chair and implicit threats of dismissal, is a historically sure way to high inflation.
This is an updated version of an article that was originally published by The Conversation on June 14, 2024.
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.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Christina Erickson, Associate Dean in the College of Nursing and Professional Disciplines, University of North Dakota
_Nearly a half-century after the Supreme Court ruled that school spankings are permissible and not “cruel and unusual punishment”, many U.S. states allow physical punishment for students who have misbehaved.
Christina Erickson, an associate dean and professor of social work at the University of North Dakota, wrote a book on the subject: “Spanked: How Hitting Our Children is Harming Ourselves.” She discussed the scope of the practice and its effects with The Conversation.
What spanking legislation exists worldwide?
Around the world, 68 countries have banned the hitting of children in any form, including spanking. This movement began in 1979 with Sweden’s ban on all forms of physical punishment, including spanking in any setting, and including in the family home.
Each state in the U.S. has its own child abuse laws, and all states, tribes and territories aim to protect children from abuse. But all state laws also allow parents to hit their children if it does not leave an injury or a mark.
A typical example is Oklahoma’s definition of child abuse and neglect. It includes an exception that permits parents to use ordinary force as a means of discipline, including spanking, using an implement like a switch or a paddle. However, leaving evidence of hitting, such as welts, bruises, swelling or lacerations, is illegal and considered child abuse in all states.
Parental spanking of children is considered unique from other physical violence because of the relational context and the purpose. Laws entitle parents to hit their children for the purpose of teaching a lesson or punishing them to improve behavior. Children are the only individuals in society who can be hit by another person and the law does not regard it as assault.
Spanking’s impact on a child is unfortunately similar to abusive hitting. Spanking has been labeled as an “Adverse Childhood Experience,” or ACE. These are events that cause poor health outcomes over the span of one’s life.
Some school districts require permission from parents to allow disciplinary paddling in school, while others do not require any communication. State law does not assure agreement between parents and school districts on what offenses warrant a paddling. Parents may feel they have no alternative but to keep their child in school, or fear reprisal from school administrators. Some students are old enough to denounce the punishment themselves.
In this school district, physical punishment is used only when parents give written permission.
Is spanking considered the same as hitting?
The term spank conceals the concept of hitting and is so commonplace it goes unquestioned, despite the fact that it is a grown adult hitting a person much smaller than them. The concept is further concealed because hitting a child’s bottom hides any injuries that may occur.
Types of hitting that are categorized as spanking have narrowed over the years but still persist. Some parents still use implements such as tree switches, wooden spoons, shoes or paddles to “spank” children, raising the chances for abuse.
Most spanking ends by the age of 12, partly because children this age are able to fight back. When a child turns 18, parental hitting becomes the same as hitting any other adult, a form of domestic violence or assault throughout the U.S.
There is a lack of a consistent understanding of what constitutes a spanking. The definition of spanking is unique to each family. The number of hits, clothed or not, or using an implement, all reflect geographical or familial differences in understanding what a spanking is.
How do US adults view spanking?
People in the United States generally accept spanking as part of raising children: 56% of U.S. adults strongly agree or agree that “… it is sometimes necessary to discipline a child with a good, hard spanking.” This view has been slowly changing since 1986, when 83% of adults agreed with that statement.
The laws worldwide that protect children from being hit usually begin by disallowing nonparental adults to hit children. This is happening in the U.S. too, where 31 states have banned paddling in schools.
With the slow but steady drop of parents who believe that sometimes children need a good hard spanking, as well as the ban of paddling in schools in 31 states, one could argue that the U.S. is moving toward a reduction in spanking.
What does research say about spanking?
Spanking’s negative influence on children’s behavior has been documented for decades. Spanking seems to work in the moment when it comes to changing or stopping the immediate behavior, but the negative effects are hidden in the short term and occur later in the child’s life. Yet because the spanking seemed to work at the time, the parent doesn’t connect the continued bad behavior of the child to the spanking.
No studies have shown positive long-term benefits from spanking. Because of the long-standing and expansive research findings showing a range of harm from spanking and the increased association with child abuse, the American Psychological Association recommends that parents should never spank their children.
What are some resources for parents?
Consider these questions when choosing a discipline method for your child:
Is the expectation of your child developmentally accurate? One of the most common reasons parents spank is because they are expecting a behavior the child is not developmentally able to execute.
Can the discipline you choose grow with your child? Nearly all spanking ends by age 12, when kids are big enough to fight back. Choose discipline methods you can use over the long term, such as additional chores, apologies, difficult conversations and others that can grow with your child.
Might there be another explanation for your child’s behavior? Difficulty of understanding, fear or miscommunication? Think of your child as a learner and use a growth mindset to help your child learn from their life experiences.
Parents are the leaders of their families. Good leaders show strength in nonthreatening ways, listen to others and explain their decisions. Don’t spoil your kids. But being firm does not have to include hitting.
Practicing calm when with your children will help you be calmer at work and in your other relationships. Listening to and speaking with a child about challenges, even from a very early age, is the best way to make it part of your relationship for the rest of your life.
Choose a method that allows you to grow. Parents matter too.
Christina Erickson 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.
Weeks into his second term, Trump took action, signing an executive order on “Eradicating Anti-Christian Bias.” The order vowed to “protect the religious freedoms of Americans and end the anti-Christian weaponization of government” by identifying anti-Christian conduct and recommending policy changes. In mid-April, Secretary of State Marco Rubio instructed employees in the State Department to report any incidents of such bias that occurred during the Biden administration.
Many critics contestclaims of widespread discrimination against Christians in U.S. society, given that Christians are the country’s largest faith group and benefit from associated privileges. Consider how Christmas is recognized as a federal holiday, whereas other faiths’ major holidays are not.
Many scholars have argued that, at the root, some white and Christian Americans feel threatened by these demographic shifts. Increasing secularization and other cultural changes have added to some white Christians’ sense that their identity is under attack. According to FBI data, however, only 3% of hate crimes over the past five years targeted Christians. In comparison, 14% targeted Jews, Muslims or Sikhs – groups that make up just 3% of the population.
The Public Religion Research Institute found that 55% of white Americans believe discrimination against white people is as much of a problem as discrimination against minority groups. Meanwhile, 60% of white evangelicals say that Christians in the U.S. face discrimination.
In his executive order, Trump echoes these perceptions of threat, painting a picture of embattlement for Christians.
Historically, white peopleand Christians were often treated as the quintessential Americans – meaning race and religion are tightly connected in U.S. culture.
In our four experiments, published in Psychological Science in March 2024, we tested these connections between views of race and religion, focusing on claims about anti-Christian bias.
First, in two online experiments of about 3,000 participants, we randomly assigned white and Black Christians to one of four groups. One group did not read anything, while the other three were each given a brief blurb about discrimination. Each blurb summarized a different group’s fears that bias against them was increasing: white Americans, Black Americans and Christian Americans.
Afterward, we asked all the participants to assess how much bias they think those groups actually face. Compared to white Christians who did not read anything, white Christians who read the blurb about anti-Christian bias perceived greater anti-white bias. Black Christians who read the blurb about anti-Christian bias, however, did not perceive greater anti-white bias than Black Christians who did not read anything.
Thus, it appears that the white Christians mentally linked anti-Christian and anti-white bias.
In our other two experiments, we randomly assigned about 1,000 white and Black Christians to read an interview excerpt from a fictional local politician who was asked about the most pressing issue in their community. The politician either voiced concern about anti-Christian bias, anti-white bias, religious freedom or the economy.
Afterward, we asked participants several questions about the politician, including whether they thought this figure was liberal or conservative, and whether they thought this figure would be “concerned about bias against white people.” Black and white Christian respondents believed the politician who voiced concern about anti-Christian bias was also more likely to fight for the rights of white people, relative to the politician who discussed the economy.
We also asked participants whether they found the politician’s interview offensive. Both Black and white Christians viewed the message about anti-Christian bias as less offensive than the message about anti-white bias.
Importantly, these effects held regardless of whether participants believed the politician was conservative or liberal.
Taken together, these findings suggest that expressing concern for anti-Christian bias can be interpreted as signaling allegiance to white people – without the social cost of being accused of racism. Instead, allegations of anti-Christian bias can be presented in a positive way as issues of “religious freedom,” a core American value.
Whether intentionally or not, it seems that rallying around anti-Christian bias can serve as a “dog whistle” signaling support for people concerned about changes in America’s racial makeup, as well.
Michael Pasek receives funding from the Russell Sage Foundation.
Clara L. Wilkins and Rosemary (Marah) Al-Kire 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.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Zachary del Rosario, Assistant Professor of Engineering, Olin College of Engineering
When engineers design things, they use models to predict how the things will work in the natural world. But all models have limitations. MTStock Studio/E+ via Getty Images
Nicknamed “Galloping Gertie” for its tendency to bend and undulate, the Tacoma Narrows Bridge had just opened to traffic on July 1, 1940. In a now infamous failure, in the face of moderate winds the morning of Nov. 7, 1940, the bridge started to repeatedly twist. After an hour of twisting, the bridge collapsed. One fatal engineering assumption led the bridge to shake itself apart.
At the time, many designers believed that wind could not cause bridges to move up and down. That it actually can may seem like an obvious fact now, but that incorrect assumption cost about US$65 million in today’s dollars and a dog’s life.
Small vertical movements allowed the bridge to twist. Near the end, the bridge twisted in ways the designers had never anticipated. This twisting stressed the bridge until the Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapsed.
By assuming no vertical movement from wind, the engineers didn’t study how parts of the bridge would flutter in the wind before they built the bridge. This oversight ultimately doomed the bridge.
The Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapsed in 1940 because its designers assumed it wouldn’t flutter up and down in the wind, but it ended up being slender enough that the wind caused it to move up and down. University of Washington Libraries Digital Collections
This failure illustrates an idea that many engineering students learn during their coursework: All engineering calculations are based on models. Safe design requires engineers to recognize the assumptions in their models and to ensure the design’s safety despite any limitations.
I am an expert in computational modeling, which I teach at Olin College. In my classes, I talk about models and teach engineers to use them safely.
Models are interpretive frameworks that help scientists and engineers connect data to the real world. For instance, you likely have an everyday sense for the strength of objects: If you bend a piece of wood with enough force, it will break. A stronger board can take more force.
Engineers have models that make this everyday sense more precise.
Engineering strength depends on an interpretive framework that relates forces, the size of an object and their ratio − which represents mechanical stress. What engineers call “strength” relates to this computed stress.
Considering strength helps engineers select a material that is strong enough to build a bridge.
An interpretive framework − a model − for strength, used in engineering. Force, F, and size or area, A, are used to compute stress, sigma. Sigma is then used to determine strength. Jorge Stolfi/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA
But all models leave out details from the real world. To compute stress, an engineer needs to describe the shape of an object. Real objects are complex, so the engineer simplifies their shape for the sake of computation.
For instance, an engineer may take a complex bundle of wires and assume they act together as a single cylinder. This simplified shape may help them choose how many wires to bundle together and set the overall thickness of the bundle.
However, assumptions introduce limitations: The cylinder simplification assumes the individual wires don’t exist, so it doesn’t help determine how to weave the wires together. Engineers can − and do − make more detailed models where they need to, but even those have assumptions and limitations.
Simplification of a wire rope as an assumed cylinder. This assumption may be appropriate for choosing the number of wires, but it is wholly inappropriate for determining the arrangement of wires. HaeB/Wikimedia Commons, modified by Zachary del Rosario, CC BY-SA
This interplay between assumptions and limitations is at the heart of all models. Engineers working on the Tacoma Narrows Bridge assumed no wind-driven vertical movement, which led to a limitation: They couldn’t predict the wind-driven flutter that shook the bridge apart.
The same idea holds true for more abstract models. Some companies that make facial recognition systems based on artificial intelligence assume their systems are accurate, given that they do a good job of picking out the correct face from a set of training data. However, outside researchers have shown that some training datasets introduce limitations.
The engineers who built these training datasets assumed their data had enough faces to represent most people, but these datasets underrepresented nonwhite people. This limitation led the systems to disproportionately target Black people.
The trick to using models safely is to pick assumptions where the limitations do not ruin their intended use. The gold standard is to test. But testing isn’t always possible. For example, building a test bridge isn’t a luxury that structural engineers can afford.
Carefully selecting and creating proper models requires good judgment.
Teaching modeling
Engineering judgment involves a careful balance of trust and skepticism toward mathematics − the bedrock of many engineering models. Developing engineering judgment is difficult, and it usually emerges from years of experience. I teach a modeling and simulation course that jump-starts students’ engineering judgment.
My co-instructors and I invite students to build their own models, which is a pretty uncommon experience for engineering students. Students then identify the assumptions in their models, state their limitations and, importantly, justify how those limitations do not prevent them from safely using the model.
Example diagram of a model intended for choosing the size of a wire rope. The model is based on the assumption that the rope will be a solid cylinder. This imposes limitations on studying how the wires are woven together, but it doesn’t hinder the model’s intended use. 4300streetcar/Wikimedia Commons, modified by Zachary del Rosario, CC BY-SA
Engineering failures like the Tacoma Narrows Bridge can occur when engineers are not aware of a model’s assumptions and limitations. While courses often teach young engineers to make assumptions and use models, they rarely focus on these models’ limitations. Helping students develop their engineering judgment can prevent failures like “Galloping Gertie” from happening again.
Zachary del Rosario receives funding from the National Science Foundation and Toyota Research Institute.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Matthew Melia, Senior Lecturer and Course leader of the Humanities Foundation Degree, Kingston University
Nostalgia for the 1980s has been in vogue since the release of Stranger Things in 2016. The Netflix show brought about a renaissance of interest in the popular culture of the time firmly rooted in nostalgia – video game arcades, the role-playing game Dungeons and Dragons, horror films and a reverie for the horror of the VHS and video-nasty era.
Don’t get me wrong, I am a big fan of this form of nostalgia – if it’s done right. Freaky Tales, an anthology film that deals with 80s’ California punk, anti-fascism, hip-hop and VHS culture, could have been a great addition to this sort of nostalgia bait. Sadly, it is a mess, which, for most of its run time, feels like a film about the 80s generated by AI.
To go on TikTok is to be confronted by a gen-Z army cosplaying a neon-drenched and romanticised version of the 80s. Filters are used to replicate the low-fi aesthetics of VHS tape, super 8 and cinefilm, while the content creators dress in the styles of the decade and espouse a wishful nostalgia for an era they are at least three decades too young to have experienced firsthand. Freaky Tales seems aimed at this market.
But this is how the nostalgia industry (or nostalgia capitalism) works. Contemporary digital media facilitates and creates nostalgia in a way that gives the appearance of authenticity but is mostly all surface. Nostalgia is passed on, remediated and sanitised.
Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.
It’s worth also noting that it’s always the Hollywood synthy, US version of 80s pop culture that dominates. Few young people have developed a fabricated sense of nostalgia for the dreariness of Thatcher’s Britain, for instance. A period that history academic Lucy Robinson writes was full of “pop culture and politics … that shaped modern Britain,” in her incisive critical assessment Now That’s What I Call A History of the 1980s.
Freaky Tales is comprised of four interlocking stories, which are bound in a way that is hard to really comprehend.
Are the stories connected through the two sets of characters – a couple of young punks and a pair of female hip-hop artists – leaving a screening of The Lost Boys who reappear in different stories? Is it the strange alien green glow that reappears across all the stories? The marker of a solid anthology film is a tight structure and a sense of place, which the film at least has with all stories based in Oakland, California. But for the most part, Freaky Tales feels half built and uncertain of itself.
Buried somewhere though is a better film trying to get out. Take the first story “Strength in Numbers: the Gilman Strikes Back about the denizens of the Gilman punk club in Oakland, taking a violent and gory stand against a band of neo-nazis they are being harassed by.
The sequence ends in a sort of bloody 1980s’ punk version of the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral (there are also clear references to Walter Hill’s 1979 cult classic The Warriors). Here there was an opportunity to look deeper into the emergence of California punk culture of the era, the Gilman is a place of real cultural significance where the scene fermented and bands like Rancid, The Offspring, Green Day and the East Bay punk scene in the 1990s got a start.
Dead Kennedy’s track Nazi Punks Fuck Off became a rallying cry of 80s anti-fascist punk as did Black Flag’s Rise Above (this is at least included on the film’s soundtrack). So why not look at least a little deeper into the antifascist movement within the US punk movement during the era? It can be done and I’d recommend Jeremy Saulnier’s harrowing 2015 film Green Room, which examines the subject from a more contemporary perspective.
Instead, the film adopts a rather more facile approach. This is most evident in its choice to use animated “bangs” and “thwocks” like a Batman comic during the big fight sequence. By and large this section (by far the worst of the four) feels like content devoid of substance.
In story two, “Don’t fight The Feeling”, the action centres around a pair of aspiring female hip-hop performers who enter into a rap battle with the performer Too Short (the real life Too Short appears in a cameo as a cop later in the film) and tackles misogyny and hip-hop culture. There are shades of seminal black indie director Spike Lee (Do The Right Thing, 1989) here in its foregrounding of black culture and subjects (although, it must be said, Ryan Fleck and Anna Boden are both white).
It could have potentially complemented the punk story if it dealt with the cultural impact of 80s’ hip-hop and the struggles of female performers. But again, it feels half formed – part of the problem being that the film is trying perhaps to do too much.
There are things to enjoy, however, in the film. It is pleasingly gory and has some clever moments. Man of the moment Pedro Pascal takes the lead in the third section (the best of the four), “Born to Mack”, as an enforcer trying to go straight and Ben Mendelsohn puts in an enjoyably sleazy turn as a corrupt cop. The success of the film rest’s chiefly on their shoulders.
Born to Mack clearly has shades of the king of pop culture nostalgia Quentin Tarantino, especially in its clever and surprising cameo from 80s’ icon Tom Hanks who plays a mysterious video store owner. Tarantino’s films (not least 1994’s Pulp Fiction – the blueprint for this type of anthologised nostalgia cinema) were at the forefront 1990s’ indie cinema, and were framed by his obsessions with 60s, 70s and 80s pop culture.
Freaky Tales has the potential to offer a more nuanced engagement with the era and its cultural references points while still maintaining a sense of Trashy exploitation fun. Sadly it falls short of the mark.
Freaky Tales is in selected cinemas from April 18 and on digital platforms from April 28.
Matthew Melia 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.
What place do graduates of technical fields of education occupy in the labour market? What salary can a young engineer expect? To what extent does his success in the labour market depend on the field of study, are all young engineers equally in demand in the labour market? In which regions is there a greater demand for graduates? The answers to these and other questions are provided by a study by HSE scientists, presented at the round table “Graduates of Engineering Specialties in the Russian Labour Market: Myths and Reality” within the framework of XXV Yasinsky (April) International Scientific Conference.
The report was given by the Vice-Rector of the National Research University Higher School of Economics, Head of the Labor Market Research Laboratory Sergey Roshchin. He noted that today the labor market in Russia is in a situation of demographic compression and that this situation will persist in the long term. At the same time, the national priorities in the field of technological leadership already defined by the country’s leadership impose additional requirements for the training of specialists who could ensure such leadership. Therefore, the characteristics of the labor market for graduates of engineering training areas and the level of young engineers represented in this market are of particular interest and importance.
As Sergey Roshchin noted in his report, engineering and technical sciences are the most widespread group of graduates. In total, from 2018 to 2024, 27.9% of all graduates were enrolled in higher education programs (bachelor’s, specialist, master’s) in the field of engineering, technology and technical sciences. This is more than in other areas of higher education. But it is not only the number of specialists being trained that is important, but also their quality. If we divide universities that train engineering personnel by the quality of training based on the average Unified State Exam score required for admission to programs at these universities, then 50% of engineering graduates graduate from low-selective programs and universities where 59 or fewer Unified State Exam scores are enough for admission, and this largely determines the quality of engineers we have at the end. “And only 40% of the training of engineers can we consider as sufficiently high-quality, taking into account who comes [to study] and what quality is provided by certain universities,” Sergey Roshchin explained.
An interesting phenomenon has emerged in the training of engineers: students who studied on fee-paying places receive, on average, a higher starting salary than graduates who studied on budget places. This is explained by the fact that studying at a selective university provides its graduates with a high level of income: the salary of graduates of the most selective universities is almost 2 times higher than the salary of those who graduated from the least selective universities.
And families are ready to pay for quality education in more selective universities. Only 10% of fee-paying places are concentrated in the low-selectivity group of universities, while 20% are concentrated in the most selective group. It is not important what type of funding a student receives – fee-paying or state-funded, but what university he or she attends in terms of the quality of training.
“The most important criterion is the form of study: part-time or full-time. Oddly enough, engineering training in the form of part-time study is represented by a solid number. A third of those who graduate are part-time students,” says Sergey Roshchin. Having cited precise statistics on different areas of training, form (full-time and part-time), as well as the level of study (bachelor’s and master’s degrees), he drew attention to the fact that the prospects in the labor market for graduates of full-time and part-time forms of study are different. “Part-time students enter the labor market with starting salaries slightly higher than those of full-time students, but then they remain stagnant. Already in the horizon of two to five years, full-time students are ahead in terms of salary growth, in terms of promotion to more in-demand jobs, and part-time students remain where they were,” the vice-rector explained.
Another observation was that more than half of engineering graduates are concentrated in three key industries: manufacturing; information and communications; and scientific and technical activities. Among the industries with the highest salary levels are mining, information and communications, finance, and insurance.
The most alarming fact, according to Sergey Roshchin, is that 41% of bachelor’s degree graduates and 20% of master’s degree graduates are employed in jobs that do not require higher education according to the OKZ (All-Russian Classifier of Occupations) classification. “In essence, higher education is only needed to occupy positions such as manager and top-level specialist,” the vice-rector comments. “In lower positions, higher education is usually not required. And this is a big question, how the market sees engineering education, whether there is really a need for so many engineers with higher education. Or, perhaps, it is the quality of higher education that does not allow one to occupy positions corresponding to this level.”
Sergey Roshchin also touched upon the topic of regional differentiation. “In general, from all our previous works, reports, and analyses, we know that graduates are very mobile,” he notes. “40% of graduates who have received higher education move to another region.” The most popular for moving were Moscow (29%), Moscow Region (10%), St. Petersburg (8%), KhMAO (5%), and Krasnodar Krai (3%). At the same time, the average salary of those who left the region of study is 110.8 thousand rubles, and those who remained in the region of study – 90.4 thousand rubles. But for the interaction of engineering education and the labor market from a regional point of view, something else is important. The main (45%) training of engineers is conducted in six regions: Moscow, St. Petersburg, the republics of Tatarstan and Bashkortostan, Sverdlovsk and Rostov Regions. And these same territories are the main consumers of engineering personnel. In the labor market of engineers, there is a regional balance of labor and education markets in the main core of training. At the same time, of course, if we consider individual regions and areas of training, certain disproportions exist.
The report allows us to conclude that there are areas of absolute inefficiency in the training of engineers. These are areas such as technosphere safety, light industry technologies, and food technologies. Graduates of these areas look like outsiders in the labor market compared to other engineers.
In conclusion, Sergei Roshchin noted “that the answers to technological challenges associated with the tasks of ensuring technological leadership probably lie not in increasing the number (including through government procurement), but in changing the structure and quality of training engineers.”
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Written by Margaret Deahn, Ph.D. Student at Purdue University Last week, NASA’s Mars 2020 rover continued its journey down lower ‘Witch Hazel Hill’ on the Jezero crater rim. The rover stopped along a boundary visible from orbit dividing light and dark rock outcrop (also known as a contact) at a site the team has called ‘Port Anson’. In addition to this contact, the rover has encountered a variety of neat rocks that may have originated from elsewhere and transported to their current location, also known as float.
Pictured above is an observation named ‘Skull Hill’ taken by the rover’s Mastcam-Z instrument. This float rock uniquely contrasts the surrounding light-toned outcrop with its dark tone and angular surface, and it features a few pits in the rock. If you look closely, you might even spot spherules within the surrounding regolith! See Alex Jones’ recent blog post for more information on these neat features: https://science.nasa.gov/blog/shocking-spherules/. The pits on Skull Hill may have formed via the erosion of clasts from the rock or scouring by wind. We’ve found a few of these dark-toned floats in the Port Anson region, and the team is working to better understand where these rocks came from and how they got here. Skull Hill’s dark color is reminiscent of meteorites found in Gale crater by the Curiosity rover: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/curiosity-mars-rover-checks-odd-looking-iron-meteorite/. Chemical composition is an important factor in identifying a meteorite, and Gale’s meteorites contain significant amounts of iron and nickel. However, recent analysis of SuperCam data from nearby similar rocks suggests a composition inconsistent with a meteorite origin. Alternatively, ‘Skull Hill’ could be an igneous rock eroded from a nearby outcrop or ejected from an impact crater. On Earth and Mars, iron and magnesium are some of the main contributors to igneous rocks, which form from the cooling of magma or lava. These rocks can include dark-colored minerals such as olivine, pyroxene, amphibole, and biotite. Luckily for us, the rover has instruments that can measure the chemical composition of rocks on Mars. Understanding the composition of these darker-toned floats will help the team to interpret the origin of this unique rock!
