 |
|
|
|||||
India is on the moon, S. Somanath, chairman of the Indian Space Research Organization, announced in August 2023. The announcement meant India had joined the short list of countries to have visited the moon, and the applause and shouts of joy that followed signified that this achievement wasnt just a scientific one, but a cultural one. Over the past decade, many countries have established new space programs, including multiple African nations. India and Israelnations that were not technical contributors to the space race in the 1960s and 70shave attempted landings on the lunar surface. With more countries joining the evolving space economy, many of our colleagues in space strategy, policy ethics, and law have celebrated the democratization of space: the hope that space is now more accessible for diverse participants. We are a team of researchers based across four countries with expertise in space policy and law, ethics, geography, and anthropology who have written about the difficulties and importance of inclusion in space. Major players like the U.S., the European Union, and China may once have dominated space and seen it as a place to try out new commercial and military ventures. Emerging new players in space, like other countries, commercial interests, and nongovernmental organizations, may have other goals and rationales. Unexpected new initiatives from these newcomers could shift perceptions of space from something to dominate and possess to something more inclusive, equitable, and democratic. We address these emerging and historical tensions in a paper published in May 2025 in the journal Nature, in which we describe the difficulties and importance of including nontraditional actors and Indigenous peoples in the space industry. Continuing inequalities among space players Not all countries space agencies are equal. Newer agencies often dont have the same resources behind them that large, established players do. The U.S. and Chinese programs receive much more funding than those of any other country. Because they are most frequently sending up satellites and proposing new ideas puts them in the position to establish conventions for satellite systems, landing sites, and resource extraction that everyone else may have to follow. Sometimes, countries may have operated on the assumption that owning a satellite would give them the appearance of soft or hard geopolitical power as a space nation, and ultimately gain relevance. In reality, student groups of today can develop small satellites, called CubeSats, autonomously, and recent scholarship has concluded that even successful space missions may negatively affect the international relationships between some countries and their partners. The respect a country expects to receive may not materialize, and the costs to keep up can outstrip gains in potential prestige. Environmental protection and Indigenous perspectives Usually, building the infrastructure necessary to test and launch rockets requires a remote area with established roads. In many cases, companies and space agencies have placed these facilities on lands where Indigenous peoples have strong claims, which can lead to land disputes, like in western Australia. Many of these sites have already been subject to human-made changes, through mining and resource extraction in the past. Many sites have been ground zero for tensions with Indigenous peoples over land use. Within these contested spaces, disputes are rife. Because of these tensions around land use, it is important to include Indigenous claims and perspectives. Doing so can help make sure that the goal of protecting the environments of outer space and Earth are not cast aside while building space infrastructure here on Earth. Some efforts are driving this more inclusive approach to engagement in space, including initiatives like Dark and Quiet Skies, a movement that works to ensure that people can stargaze and engage with the stars without noise or sound pollution. This movement and other inclusive approaches operate on the principle of reciprocity: that more players getting involved with space can benefit all. Researchers have recognized similar dynamics within the larger space industry. Some scholars have come to the conclusion that even though the space industry is pay to play, commitments to reciprocity can help ensure that players in space exploration who may not have the financial or infrastructural means to support individual efforts can still access broader structures of support. The downside of more players entering space is that this expansion can make protecting the environmentboth on Earth and beyondeven harder. The more players there are, at both private and international levels, the more difficult sustainable space exploration could become. Even with good will and the best of intentions, it would be difficult to enforce uniform standards for the exploration and use of space resources that would protect the lunar surface, Mars, and beyond. It may also grow harder to police the launch of satellites and dedicated constellations. Limiting the number of satellites could prevent space junk, protect the satellites already in orbit, and allow everyone to have a clear view of the night sky. However, this would have to compete with efforts to expand internet access to all. What is space exploration for? Before tackling these issues, we find it useful to think about the larger goal of space exploration, and what the different approaches are. One approach would be the fast and inclusive democratization of space, making it easier for more players to join in. Another would be a more conservative and slower big player approach, which would restrict who can go to space. The conservative approach is liable to leave developing nations and Indigenous peoples firmly on the outside of a key process shaping humanitys shared future. But a faster and more inclusive approach to space would not be easy to run. More serious players means it would be harder to come to an agreement about regulations, as well as the larger goals for human expansion into space. Narratives around emerging technologies, such as those required for space exploration, can change over time, as people begin to see them in action. Technology that we take for granted today was once viewed as futuristic or fantastical, and sometimes with suspicion. For example, at the end of the 1940s, George Orwell imagined a world in which totalitarian systems used tele-screens and videoconferencing to control the masses. Earlier in the same decade, Thomas J. Watson, then president of IBM, notoriously predicted that there would be a global market for about five computers. We as humans often fear or mistrust future technologies. However, not all technological shifts are detrimental, and some technological changes can have clear benefits. In the future, robots may perform tasks too dangerous, too difficult, or too dull and repetitive for humans. Biotechnology may make life healthier. Artificial intelligence can sift through vast amounts of data and turn it into reliable guesswork. Researchers can also see genuine downsides to each of these technologies. Space exploration is harder to squeeze into one streamlined narrative about the anticipated benefits. The process is just too big and too transformative. To return to the question of whether we should go to space, our team argues that it is not a question of whether or not we should go, but rather a question of why we do it, who benefits from space exploration, and how we can democratize access to broader segments of society. Including a diversity of opinions and viewpoints can help find productive ways forward. Ultimately, it is not necessary for everyone to land on one single narrative about the value of space exploration. Even our team of four researchers doesnt share a single set of beliefs about its value. But bringing more nations, tribes, and companies into discussions around its potential value can help create collaborative and worthwhile goals at an international scale. Timiebi Aganaba is an assistant professor of space and society at Arizona State University. Adam Fish is an associate professor at the School of Arts and Media at UNSW Sydney. Deondre Smiles is an assistant professor of geography at the University of Victoria. Tony Milligan is a research fellow in the philosophy of ethics at King’s College London. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
When I ran into a former client at the grocery store, and asked him how things were going, I expected some polite small talk. Instead, what he said blew my mind. The guy (lets call him Jim) was an employee of a company that our agency, Blueprint Creative, had worked with a few years back to improve their employee experience program. One of our main brand interventions included articulating and documenting the companys core values: the nonnegotiable principles that would provide their employees with guidance on what on-the-job behaviors would be encouraged and rewarded, and what behaviors simply would not be tolerated. During our conversation, I asked Jim how things were going at the company after our brand intervention. He said (and this is a direct quote), Things are going well for the company, but they are going even better for me. I decided to adopt the companys core values in my personal life and I feel like Im now a better husband and a better father. Wait, what? What we were aiming for during our brand intervention was for the organization to have core values that every employee could embrace and use as a compass to guide their actions in the workplace. But, clearly, by integrating his companys core values into his outside-the-workplace routine, Jim had become not just his best version in his professional life, but also in his personal life. Unfortunately, this isnt the case at many companies around the world. After all, one of the core values of Enron, the company at the center of one of the U.S.s biggest fraud and accounting scandals, was integritya core value that employees had violated with impunity. But, at Jims company, their core values were so sticky that they stuck with some employees even after they left the office to go home. This is pretty extraordinary, considering that research shows that just 23% of U.S. employees strongly agree that they can apply their organizations values to their work every day. Presumably, even fewer people believe that they can apply their organizations values to their personal lives. So, how do some companies end up with compelling core values that, as in Jims case, transform lives, while at other companies, employees dont even know what their organization’s core values are, or (like Enron), openly flout and disrespect their organizations core values? Here are a few tips on how you can develop a set of sticky core values that are adopted and respected by your employees. Avoid generalization and ambiguity Avoid generalized core values like Teamwork, Integrity, and Trust. Whether we like it or not, words like these mean different things to different people. Take integrity, for instance. Some companies codes of ethics may prevent them from ever engaging in fraudulent behavior like Enron did, but the company may have no problem developing products that harm the environment, which some individuals may consider to be unethical behaviormaking a core value of integrity ambiguous, open to interpretation, and, by extension, difficult to enforce. When articulating your core values, avoid using words wrapped in language of generalization or ambiguity. Instead, be specific and unambiguous by getting to the very core of your core values. Read on to find out how. Get to the core of your core values Identify the core element of the principles you want your employees to embrace. For instance, at Blueprint Creative, while we wanted our team members to embrace the principle of teamwork, we drilled down to the specific element of teamwork that we want all of our staff to embodythat of having each others backs. Thats why one of our most treasured core values is look out for each other. This action-oriented core value has become one of our team members favorite principles and is extremely effective in maintaining a culture where each individual knows that their colleagues will go the extra mile to help and support them. If you want your core values to be effective, be very specific about the core elements of each principle you want your staff to follow. For instance, if your definition of integrity involves environmental protection, your list of core values could include minimize damage to the environment. Similarly, the core of the broad principle of Innovation could be Be a Problem Solver or Solve Customers Most Burning Problems. If you want to articulate a core value that emphasizes exceeding coworkers and customers expectations, your core value could be Go the Extra Mile. Be highly descriptive In order for core values to be truly compelling, you must describe and document in no uncertain terms what it means to live your core values. Consider developing a Core Values Handbook, or an audio or video series that explains what each one of your core values means and how each individual can apply your core values to their roles. Use real-world examples, stories and analogies that leave no room for misinterpretation. By being highly descriptive, you can provide the clarity employees need to live your core values the way they were intended to be lived. Integrate core values into everyday conversation If you want your core values to be lived every day, refer to them every day. Thats exactly what Tasty Catering does. At the beginning of every meeting of three or more employees, Tasty Catering employees repeat the companys core values, leading to employees repeating core values multiple times per weekmaking it virtually impossible for employees to forget what their core values are. Staff members are also encouraged to use their core values to resolve disputes and make decisions. If you want your core values to be effective, find ways to integrate your core values into the daily lives of your employees. Choose core values that extend beyond the workplace People are more at peace when the principles that guide their personal and professional lives are aligned. No one wants to be guided by one set of principles at home and by another set of (oftentimes conflicting) principles at work. As Mahatma Gandhi is often quoted as having said, Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony. What Jim did by adopting the companys core values in his personal life led his thoughts, words, and actions to be in perfect alignment whether he was in the workplace with his colleagues or whether he was at home with his wife and kids. But, that only happened because the core values themselves were worthy of being adopted in his personal lifenot just his professional life. Choose core values that add value to your employees professional and personal lives. Enact accountability Never allow your employees to disrespect your core values. If the infraction is minor, a transparent and direct conversation with the employee who has acted counter to your core values should be enough to get that employee back on the right track. But serious (or repeated) infractions may require disciplinary action or even dismissal, especially if that infraction threatens the companysfuture or puts employees at riskfor example, if an employee ignores safety procedures or acts in ways that put the company in legal jeopardy. Having compelling core values can make it much easier to manage your employees and can lead to a competitive advantage in the marketbut only if your employees embrace and live them every single day. The above tips can help transform your core values from being forgettable into powerful, sticky tools that help you to build a stronger brand and a stronger business.
Category:
E-Commerce
Greetings, everyone, and welcome back to Fast Companys Plugged In. It was one of the best-received pieces of Apple news I can recall. At the companys WWDC conference last month, it announced that its iPadOS 26 software upgrade would give the iPad a powerful new interface closely modeled on the one offered by the Mac. The response can be fairly summarized as finally. Its over: Apple has fixed multitasking on the iPad, mimicking the experience on the Mac, tweeted Bloombergs Mark Gurman, who had earlier reported such a move was imminent. We won! The move is Apples most comprehensive answer to a long-simmering conundrum: How can it make the iPadwhich packs some of its most powerful hardwareinto a professional-strength computing tool? Starting now, its inviting iPad users to judge the results for themselves. After four rounds of iPadOS 26 developer betas since WWDC, the company is releasing its first public beta version of the software, along with corresponding ones for the iPhone, Mac, and Apple Watch. Final versions are scheduled to ship this fall. Theres quite a lot in iPadOS 26 I like a lot, starting with the translucent-y new Liquid Glass aestheticrough around the edges in spots, but satisfying eye candy overall. Apple has brought the Macs Preview app to iPad, beefed up the iPad Files app to more closely resemble the Macs Finder, added better support for background tasks such as video processing, and made it possible to put folders in the Dockall of which makes the iPad feel more like a full-powered productivity machine. Without making a big deal out of it, the company also improved iPadOSs support for web apps, a boon for any piece of software whose browser-based version is better than its native iPad experience. iPad apps are now fully resizable and draggable, replicating the interface Macs and Windows PCs have had for decades. However, as someone whos used an iPad as my main computer for almost 14 years, I cant join the chorus of unbridled enthusiasm for iPadOS 26s embrace of Mac conventions such as floating, overlapping windows and a menu bar at the top of the screen. Apple may well be making the right decision to please the largest pool of people who want to get work done on its tablet. But its also moving decisively away from some of the philosophies that attracted me to the platform in the first place, and Im trepidatious about where that might lead. (My Fast Company colleague Jesus Diaz expressed similar qualms right after the WWDC keynote.) Fifteen years ago, when the iPad was new, it wasnt Mac-like at all. Instead, it was often described as a giant iPhonedepending on your perspective, either high praise or a damning indictment. Soon enough, that changed. Apps arrived that let you accomplish tasks that were previously the domain of Macs and Windows PCs; accessory makers started shipping keyboard cases that turned the iPad into a mini-laptop. Apple doubled down on these trends with 2015s original iPad Pro, a bigger-screen version with optional Smart Keyboard. Ever since, the company has made new iPadsnot just the Pro, but other models such as the iPad Airmore and more capable of serious work. That included adding trackpad support in the Magic Keyboard, a classic Mac feature that made the transition to the iPad with aplomb. At the 2015 iPad Pro launch event, Apple CEO Tim Cook declared, The iPad is the clearest expression of our vision of the future of personal computing. Over the past decade, however, its become obvious that the hardware aspect of this proposition has been easier to figure out than the software. The company has made several stabs at features for letting users juggle multiple apps, all designed with touch-friendliness in mind, and seemed determined not to simply clone the Macs way of doing things. However, it never felt like the platform had solved productivity or even made steady progress in one direction. Sometimes, it felt stuck in limbo. In January 2020, Daring Fireballs John Gruber smartly analyzed why the iPads user interface could baffle the uninitiated. His critique remained relevant for every iPadOS version until iPadOS 26: To launch the first app, you tap its icon on the homescreen, just like on the iPhone, and just like on the iPad before split-screen multitasking. Tapping an icon to open an app is natural and intuitive. But to get a second app on the same screen, you cannot tap its icon. You must first slide up from the bottom of the screen to reveal the Dock. Then you must tap and hold on an app icon in the Dock. Then you drag the app icon out of the Dock to launch it in a way that it will become the second app splitting the display. But isnt dragging an icon out of the Dock the way that you remove apps from the Dock? Yes, it iswhen you do it from the homescreen. So the way you launch an app in the Dock for split-screen mode is identical to the way you remove that appfrom the Dock. Yet once I mastered these maneuvers, and learned you could also add a second app from iPadOSs Spotlight search, they became embedded in my muscle memory. More importantly, I loved that the iPad maxed out at two on-screen apps, or three if you counted the SlideOver feature. Floatable, draggable, overlappable windows of the sort that help define the Mac and Windows had always struck me as simulating a desktopbut a messy one. Any time I invested in rearranging them felt like wasted cognitive overload. iPad apps now have Mac-style menus. And submenus, some of which have so many items that you need to scroll through them. Similarly, I cherished the iPads abandonment of Mac/Windows-style menus, which felt like a card catalog overwhelmed by features I didnt need at that particular moment, if ever. By forcing iPad developers to think harder about how to engineer their interfaces for maximum efficiency, Apple gave them the opportunity to transcend the cruft of older interfaces. Many rose to the challenge. While Apple has given iPadOS 26 a full-screen-only mode for people who are just as happy using it as, well, a giant iPhone, it hasnt tossed many bones in the direction of those who liked the Split View and SlideOver features, which it has now retired. Even the fastest methods of filling the screen with two apps now take more steps and feel like work. Meanwhile, using the menu bar remains optional, though I worry that developers will begin to see it as the primary interface, not an alternative one. To me, the least successful Mac import is iPadOS 26s traffic light system for closing, minimizing, maximizing, and tiling apps. The buttons are located in the menu bar for full-screen apps and in the upper left-hand corner of partial-screen ones, imposing a mental tax as you remember where they are. And since theyre too dinky to touch with adequate precision, they expand when you engage with them, requiring you to reposition your finger or cursor. Its tough to imagine Apple coming up with them for the iPad if they werent already a Mac staple. If making the iPad more like a Mac was a potentially crowd-pleasing approach all along, why didnt Apple do it long ago? In an interview with MacStories Federico Viticci, software chief Craig Federighi said its only recently that the company has been able to engineer a full-blown windowing system that runs well on a range of iPad models. The interview is the best explanation of Apples iPadOS 26 thinking Ive seen, and I encourage you to read it if youre as interested in this stuff as I am. Still, understanding why Apple gave the iPad a Mac-esque makeover doesnt clarify its long-term strategy. Will the next few years of iPadOS releases be about bringing the platform in even closer alignment with its elder sibling? Or is there still room for them to divergeeven sharply, if appropriate? What happens if AI transforms how all computing devices work in ways nobody yet understands? Also: Are we any closer to being able to run Mac apps on an iPadnot a prospect that makes me giddy, but one certain users have long craved? (As quoted by Viticci, Federighi said the iPad shouldnt run MacOS, but he said nothing about Mac apps.) As I write, the first hands-on evaluations of iPadOS 26 in its public beta form are popping up online. So far, so good: Not to put too fine a point on it, this is the best iPad has ever been, says Gizmodos Kyle Barr. Its like a weight has been lifted from the soul of the iPad, writes Six Colors Jason Snell, a pretty dedicated user of the tablet himself. Right now, Im feeling a tad weighed down by some of the updates changes. Heres hoping they grow on me, and that iPadOS 27 and beyond reflect Apples future vision of computing rather than merely continuing to catch up with its past. Youve been reading Plugged In, Fast Companys weekly tech newsletter from me, global technology editor Harry McCracken. If a friend or colleague forwarded this edition to youor if you’re reading it on FastCompany.comyou can check out previous issues and sign up to get it yourself every Friday morning. I love hearing from you: Ping me at hmccracken@fastcompany.com with your feedback and ideas for future newsletters. I’m also on Bluesky, Mastodon, and Threads, and you can follow Plugged In on Flipboard. More top stories from Fast Company The Microsoft SharePoint breach was massive. The response has been minimalA critical vulnerability in on-premise SharePoint servers allowed state-backed hackers to breach governments and institutions worldwide. Experts are questioning why more hasn’t been done or said. Read More AI’s unfulfilled promise to small businessesExpert advice for SMBs: Start small. And rather than investing in new tools, explore the AI features already built into your existing tech stack. Read More This concept ad for Ikea shows that AI ads don’t have to be cringe‘Exploding box’ AI ads are going viral on X, and hey’re actually pretty good. Read More How to use the clean energy tax credits before they’re goneThe One Big Beautiful Bill is quickly sunsetting tax credits for all sorts of clean energy purchasesfrom EVs and heat pumps to batteries and solar panels. If you want to claim them, here are the dates each are ending. Read More This tool lets users send fake legal letters that look realwithout a lawyerHeavyweight is a free open-source project that mimics the intimidating design of legal threats to help ordinary people push backlegally or not. Read More 9 essential Perplexity AI search tips and tricksSearch engine, meet answer engine. Here’s how to get started with Perplexity. Read More
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||