Patriotism soars on the Space Coast
All three are rich in American symbolism so what better choices could be found for this week's Photo of the Week.
Let's make that plural: photos.
We were captivated by both images and their timing, particularly this week as America celebrated Independence Day.
Photographer Tim Shortt captured the photo of the rehabilitated juvenile male bald eagle as it soared back into freedom thanks to help from the Florida Wildlife Hospital & Sanctuary in Palm Shores. The eagle, released on Merritt Island on July 1, had been found grounded in early June and was nursed back to health.
The SpaceX rocket carrying a weather satellite for the European Space Agency was photographed with an American flag in the foreground as it soared off Pad 39A at Kennedy Space Center, also on July 1. Photographer Craig Bailey took that beautiful photo.
Executive Editor Mara Bellaby can be reached at mbellaby@floridatoday.com.
This article originally appeared on Florida Today: An eagle soars, a rocket flies, a flag waves | Photo of the Week
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How China is leading the humanoid robots race
I've worked at the bleeding edge of robotics innovation in the United States for almost my entire professional life. Never before have I seen another country advance so quickly. Psychologists now know exactly what makes someone cool. Turns out, the definitions are universal 3% mortgage rates aren't dead—housing market sees 127% increase in buyers taking over old loans There's a reason your Sam's Club rotisserie chicken looks different In the span of the last few years, China has overtaken the U.S. as the leader in the robotics race, especially when it comes to humanoid robots designed to mimic the human body and behavior. Earlier this year China literally raced robots against human counterparts, and they show no sign of slowing down. While AI steals the investment and media spotlight, the competition for humanoid robotics supremacy has been quietly accelerating for 50 years, and we're now on the cusp of a momentous breakthrough. Mass-produced humanoid robots may reach us within the next 3–5 years, and the market is predicted to grow to $38B within just 10 years. China is poised to capture the lion's share of this industry: Morgan Stanley found that 56% of robotics companies are already based there. However, this competition isn't just about market share—it's about industrial supremacy. Fixed industrial robots now operate with productivity rates estimated to be 10 times that of humans, working almost 24/7 with virtually no errors. In this new era of free-moving humanoid robots, adaptable machines will navigate entire factory floors with equal precision and even higher productivity rates than their fixed (and human) counterparts. American companies like Boston Dynamics are building impressive prototypes but those don't win industrial wars, production does. If the U.S. continues to lag behind in the robotics race, American businesses will face increased supply chain dependence on China and citizens could see wage stagnation and job losses to robotics leaders overseas. I witnessed the U.S. lead the world in robotic advancements. Two of my humanoid robots went into space; one called 'Robonaut' now lives in the Smithsonian. Over the past decade, our momentum has slowed. To take back robotics supremacy, the U.S. must overcome four critical hurdles that could cost us this race. Yes, Chinese robotics startups are benefiting from established supply chains, local adoption opportunities, and strong national government support, but nagging domestic problems are holding the United States back, regardless of any other country's advancements. First, we're battling our own cultural fears. There's a prevailing anxiety that robots will replace human jobs, particularly in factories. While massive change in manufacturing is fast approaching, the fear of replacement is not only wrong—it's counterproductive. Humanoid robots excel at 'dirty, dark, and dangerous' jobs that often lack willing human labor anyway. To overcome U.S. cultural fears around robotics, we must think of robots not as standing in our place but standing by our sides. WWII was won as much on the mechanized manufacturing floor as on the battlefield and novel machines were essential to winning the space race. When Robonaut shook hands with a fellow astronaut aboard the International Space Station, it was proof that robots can and should support human work, not compete with it. Second, we're not cultivating the people behind the humanoids. The real challenge in winning the humanoid race isn't job displacement; it's the massive lack of skilled domestic workers to develop, operate, and maintain advanced robotics. At Texas A&M, I teach brilliant students ready to tackle real-world problems with robots. Educating the workforce about how to leverage robots will empower the next generation and dispel fear. However, across the country, preparation for careers in STEM is lacking. We need more accessible science programs, apprenticeships, and pathways into robotics now. Third, the economics still intimidate us. Developing humanoid robots involves significant upfront costs and still faces expensive technical hurdles, including improving spatial awareness and task adaptability. But here's what the bean counters are missing: once mass production kicks in, the cost of robot labor could plummet from $10 to just $0.25 per hour in as little as 10 years. The industry will transform overnight and whichever country controls this shift owns the future of manufacturing. Focusing on the future affordability of robot labor will incentivize both the private and public sector to invest now. Fourth, our policy framework is falling behind. While the U.S. offers some incentives for research and innovation, they pale in comparison to China's commitment. The Chinese government has poured over $20 billion into robotics and next-generation technologies, providing subsidies for startups and covering costs for equipment and talent acquisition. They're projected to match U.S. robotics research and development levels by 2034. Meanwhile, current U.S. tax code continues to disincentivize longer-term innovation projects by forcing companies to pay more up front for R&D. As the U.S. federal government increasingly overlaps its ambitions with AI tech companies, so too must it champion the development of humanoid robots as a national security and productivity imperative. In tandem with overcoming these inherent challenges, the U.S. must seize two unique opportunities that offer a high return on investment and a clear path to victory. Humanoid robots can maintain our edge in advanced manufacturing. Humanoids integrated with AI and embedded into the internet of things will create smart factories that enhance precision, improve product quality, and accelerate production times. The U.S. currently leads the world in the development of smart textiles—humanoid robots could accelerate production to maintain this advantage. Warehouses offer an arena for rapid humanoid adoption. The number of warehouses across the U.S. continues to expand, with Amazon recently announcing plans for dozens more across rural areas. Our vast network of warehouses is primed for humanoid robots to revolutionize its operations by automating sorting, packing, and transport alongside humans to boost efficiency and slash costs. These aren't theoretical applications: they're already being tested at sites like BMW's South Carolina plant, where robotics partners are deployed for logistics and warehousing tasks. These deployments leverage our existing strengths in technology and innovation while addressing real, immediate market needs. We don't need to wait for the perfect humanoid robot—we can start dominating these sectors today and build from there. This race not just about machines; it's about maintaining U.S. leadership in technology, safety, and industrial strength. If we want the next generation of robotics to serve American interests, we must act now or be left standing on the sidelines of the next industrial revolution. During my two decades at NASA, I saw what American innovators can achieve when given a mission. We sent robots to the Moon, Mars, and into orbit—not because it was easy, but because we believed it mattered for future generations. That same spirit must drive our investment in humanoid robotics today so we can cross the finish line first tomorrow. This post originally appeared at to get the Fast Company newsletter:
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
How to tell if you have a ‘dopamine deficit' and what you can do to reset
Maybe you'd like to spend time on hobbies or hang out with friends, but nothing feels as exciting and engaging as it used to –– so you just squander another hour on social media. Your problem may have to do with your dopamine levels. In many parts of the world, people are fed media, activities and foods that can cause dopamine to surge and throw the balance off, and that could affect your mental health, according to Dr. Anna Lembke, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford University School of Medicine, chief of the Stanford Addiction Medicine Dual Diagnosis Clinic and author of 'Dopamine Nation: Finding Balance in the Age of Indulgence.' Lembke spoke with CNN about what dopamine is, what it does and how you can find better balance. This conversation has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity. CNN: What is dopamine exactly? Dr. Anna Lembke: Dopamine is a chemical we make in our brain. Specifically, it's a neurotransmitter. Neurotransmitters allow for fine-tuned regulation of electrical circuits. Basically, our brain is a bunch of electrical circuits, a bunch of wires in the form of neurons that conduct electrical signals that allow for information processing — the job of our brains. Dopamine has many functions, but in the last 75 years or so, it's been identified as a key player in pleasure, reward and motivation. It's not the only neurotransmitter involved in that process, but it has become a kind of common currency for neuroscientists to measure the reinforcing potential of different substances and behaviors. CNN: How does dopamine impact our mental health? Lembke: It plays a central role in the phenomenology of addiction. Addiction is a brain disease where there's dysregulation in a specific reward pathway, a specific circuit in the brain, and dopamine plays a critical role in the brain's reward pathway. When we do something that's reinforcing, that releases dopamine in the reward pathway and tells our brain, 'Oh, that's something you need to do more of. That's important for survival.' The highly reinforcing substances and behaviors that we have engineered and have access to now are overwhelming the system. (They) release so much dopamine all at once in the reward pathway that the brain has to adapt or compensate by downregulating dopamine transmission. The result is that, over time, we can enter into a chronic dopamine-deficit state, where we have essentially changed our hedonic or joy set point. Now we need more of our reward — and more potent forms –– not to feel good, but just to stop feeling bad. And when we're not 'using,' we're experiencing the universal symptoms of withdrawal from any addictive substance or behavior like anxiety, irritability, insomnia, dysphoria and craving. CNN: Does this just affect people who have an addiction to drugs or alcohol? Lembke: We're all now kind of on the spectrum of compulsive overconsumption, moving toward addiction, which is resetting our hedonic threshold –– or joy set point. We need more and more of these reinforcers to feel any pleasure at all, and when we're not using, we're dysphoric, we're irritable, we can't sleep. CNN: What kinds of things risk putting us into dopamine deficit? Lembke: A lot of different things release dopamine in the reward pathway, including things that are good for us, like learning or spending time with friends. It's not that dopamine is the villain here, that dopamine release is bad –– not at all. The problem is that we've now engineered old-fashioned drugs to be more potent than ever before, and we've also created drugs that never existed before, like digital media, like 'drugified' foods. We've even taken healthy behaviors like exercise and drugified them by (tracking) ourselves and ranking ourselves and adding in social media and social comparisons. We're now seeing more and more and more people addicted to social media, online pornography, online gambling, video games and all manner of addictive digital media. There's emerging evidence that these digital media activate the same reward pathways as drugs and alcohol and cause the same kinds of dysregulations as we see in other addictions. It's the same thing with sugar. Ultraprocessed foods cause dopamine release, and the reward pathway leads to the same kinds of behaviors as when people get addicted to drugs and alcohol. There's a growing consensus that it's basically the same disease process, just with a different object of desire or reward. CNN: How can we find out if a substance or behavior is problematic? Lembke: When we look at what makes something addictive, there are several factors. One is potency, which refers to how much dopamine is released in the reward pathway and how quickly it's released. But other factors are simple things like access. We know that the easier it is to access a reinforcing substance or behavior, the more likely people are to use it and hence get addicted to it. We now live in this world of very easy, frictionless access to a lot of rewarding substances and behaviors. Digital media in particular is a 24/7 mobile access — anytime, anywhere, to an almost infinite source. The other thing that makes something addictive is the quantity and frequency of exposure. The more dopamine hits the brain gets, the more likely it is to change and adapt in a way that can create a disease of addiction. (Social media algorithms are) actually engineered to overcome tolerance and create novelty, to encourage people to keep searching for the same or similar rewards as what they've already viewed but hopefully a little bit better. The criteria for diagnosing addiction are pretty much the same across different definitions. You're looking for the four C's: out-of-control use, compulsive use, craving and consequences — especially continued use despite consequences — as well as the physiologic criteria that indicate biological dependence. Those would be tolerance, needing more (or more potent forms) over time to get the same effect, and withdrawal when you try to stop using. CNN: What can we do to address dopamine deficit? Lembke: What I recommend is a 30-day abstinence trial, colloquially called a 'dopamine fast,' from the drug of choice. Not from all rewards but just from the problematic substance or behavior to see how difficult it is to stop — and also to see if you feel better after four weeks. Why four weeks? Because that's, on average, the amount of time it takes to reset reward pathways, at least phenomenologically. I always warn people, they're going to feel worse before they feel better. But if they get through the first 10 to 14 days, often they will feel much better. After the abstinence trial, when people want to go back to using, they just need to be very specific about what they're going to use, how much, how often, in what circumstances, how they're going to track it, and what their red flags will be for slipping back into old habits. Then they can reevaluate whether they can really use in moderation. When it comes to food, obviously, people can't abstain, and nor should they try. But they can abstain from sugar. They can abstain from ultraprocessed foods. How do we engage in pleasurable things but stop before we get to dopamine deficit? Lembke: It's not about not having pleasure in life; it is about resetting the balance so that simple pleasures are rewarding again. That is not going to happen if people are constantly indulging in these frictionless, high-potency rewards. I talk a lot about 'self-binding' and making sure we don't constantly surround ourselves with easy access to these high-potency, cheap pleasures so we don't get into that problem in the first place. But it takes intentionality because we live in a world where we're constantly being invited to consume, and we're told that the more we consume, the happier we'll be. So, it does take planning and intentionality to create barriers between ourselves and the many drugs out there. Self-binding can mean physical barriers. If the issue is food, not having ultraprocessed food or sugary food in the house. If it's cannabis, not having pot in the house, not having alcohol. Now, if it's some form of digital media, you can use time as a self-binding strategy: 'I'm only going to use on these days for this amount of time with these people.' Other people are a very important form of self-binding. We tend to do what those around us are doing, so try to hang out with people who are using substances and behaviors in a way that you want to use them. Sign up for CNN's Stress, But Less newsletter. Our six-part mindfulness guide will inform and inspire you to reduce stress while learning how to harness it.
The Verge
3 hours ago
- The Verge
Trump's spending bill includes $85 million to move a Space Shuttle.
Trump's spending bill includes $85 million to move a Space Shuttle. The target is Space Shuttle Discovery, which Texas senators are attempting to snatch from the Smithsonian. The Smithsonian estimates moving it could cost more than $300 million, and there's the small detail that the modified Boeing 747 used to transport the shuttles is no longer available.
