WASHINGTON (AP)   President Donald Trump attributed statements to a Democratic congresswoman that she didn't make as he set off an incendiary week of vilification with accusations that she and three other lawmakers of color hate America. One of his top White House advisers, Stephen Miller, reinforced the charges Sunday, pointing to their remarks about terrorism and Trump's handling of border policy and saying the lawmakers "detest America as it exists." The comments have roiled the capital and excited Trump's North Carolina rally , overshadowing distortions in rhetoric that came from many quarters and from both parties on a variety of matters over the last week-plus   the Democratic presidential campaign among them. A look at the claims and reality: LOVING AMERICA MILLER , on Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.: "You saw the quotes from Representative Omar saying some people did something at 9/11. And yes, if you watch it in context, it's worse."   interview on "Fox News Sunday." TRUMP: "When she talked about the World Trade Center being knocked down, 'some people.' You remember the famous 'some people.' These are people that, in my opinion, hate our country."   remarks on July 15 at a manufacturing event. THE FACTS: It's true that plenty of critics thought Omar sounded dismissive about the 2001 terrorist attacks in a comment in a speech in March . Those remarks, though, did not express love "for enemies like al-Qaida," as Trump put it, or any proof of hatred or detesting America. Speaking to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Omar said the group "was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties." Her phrasing   "some people did something"   struck many people as a tone-deaf way to refer to the catastrophic attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The American-Islamic group actually was founded in 1994, according to its website. Its membership skyrocketed after the 2001 attacks. In the speech, Omar said many Muslims saw their civil liberties eroded after the attacks, and she advocated for activism. "For far too long we have lived with the discomfort of being a second-class citizen and, frankly, I'm tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired of it," she said. But she also noted that "what we know, and what Islam teaches us, and what I always say, is that love trumps hate." After being criticized for her remarks, Omar noted that President George W. Bush had stood at Ground Zero days after the attacks and also referred somewhat generically to "the people who knocked these buildings down," while vowing they "will hear all of us soon." Trump is continuing to assail Omar and three other liberal Democratic women of color, challenging their loyalty to the U.S. They are Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts. The House rebuked him Tuesday for his "racist comments" after he said they should "go back" to their countries. All four are Americans; Omar was born in Somalia; the others in the U.S. Omar said Trump is a "fascist" and she and the other women he's going after will "continue to be a nightmare to this president because his policies are a nightmare to us." ___ TRUMP quotes Omar as saying: "You don't say 'America' with this intensity. You say 'al-Qaida,' it makes you proud. Al-Qaida makes you proud. You don't speak that way about America."   North Carolina rally on Wednesday. TRUMP: "I hear the way she talks about al-Qaida. Al-Qaida has killed many Americans. She said, 'You can hold your chest out, you can   when I think of America   uhh   when I think of al-Qaida, I can hold my chest out.'"   remarks Monday at a manufacturing event at the White House. THE FACTS: This is a wholly distorted account of what the Omar said. She did not voice pride in the terrorist group. Trump is referring to an interview Omar gave in 2013. In it, she talked about studying terrorism history or theory under a professor who dramatically pronounced the names of terrorist groups, as if to emphasize their evil nature. "The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said 'al-Qaida,' he sort of like   his shoulders went up" and he used a menacing, intense tone, she said. Her point was that the professor was subtly rousing suspicions of Muslims with his theatrical presentation, while pronouncing "America" without the intensity he afforded the names of terrorist groups. At no point did she say "al-Qaida" should be uttered with intensity or pride and that "America" shouldn't. ___ TRUMP , on Ocasio-Cortez: "Cortez said that illegal immigrants are more American than any person who seeks to keep them out ever will be. Can you believe that? That's what she is saying."   North Carolina rally. THE FACTS: True, except that people who come to the border and ask for refugee status can't be described as "illegal immigrants." They commit no crime by applying for that status. Ocasio-Cortez, speaking of women and children who show up seeking refuge or opportunity, said: "They're acting more American than any person who seeks to keep them out ever will be." This was from an MSNBC interview in January. At the rally, Trump refused to call the New York congresswoman by her full hyphenated surname. ___ ECONOMY TRUMP: "Economic numbers reach an all time high, the best in our Country's history."   tweet Saturday. TRUMP: "We have the strongest economy in history."   North Carolina rally. THE FACTS: The economy is not the strongest in the country's history. It expanded at an annual rate of 3.1% in the first quarter of this year. That growth was the highest in just four years for the first quarter. In the late 1990s, growth topped 4% for four straight years, a level it has not yet reached on an annual basis under Trump. Growth even reached 7.2% in 1984. The economy is now in its 121st month of growth, making it the longest expansion in history. Most of that took place under Obama. The economy grew 2.9% in 2018   the same pace it reached in 2015 under Obama   and simply hasn't hit historically high growth rates. ___ TRUMP: "I think a number that makes me the happiest is that, proportionately, the biggest gainer in this entire stock market   when you hear about how much has gone up   blue-collar workers, the biggest proportionate gainer."   Cabinet meeting Tuesday. THE FACTS: Wealthier Americans have largely benefited from the stock market gains, not blue-collar workers. The problem with the president claiming the stock market has helped working-class Americans is that the richest 10% of the country controls 84% of stock market value, according to a Federal Reserve survey. Because they hold more stocks, wealthier Americans have inherently benefited more from the 19% gain in the Standard & Poor's index of 500 stocks so far this year. Only about half of U.S. families hold stocks, so plenty of people are getting little to no benefit from the stock market gains. ___ TRUMP: "The lowest unemployment numbers ever."   North Carolina rally. THE FACTS: Not so. The 3.7% unemployment rate in the latest report is not the best in history. It's near the lowest level in 50 years, when it was 3.5%. The U.S. also had lower rates than now in the early 1950s. And during three years of World War II, the annual rate was under 2%. ___ TRUMP: "The best unemployment in our history. And likewise, women, 74 years. ... I'm sorry, women, I let you down, it's not in our history but we're going to be there very soon."   North Carolina rally. THE FACTS: No, the jobless rate for women of 3.1% in April was the lowest in 66 years, not 74, and it has since increased to 3.3% in June. The data only go back 71 years, so 74 years isn't a possibility. ___ MIGRANTS TRUMP: "The Obama Administration built the Cages, not the Trump Administration!"   tweet on July 15. THE FACTS: He is right. The same facilities that Democrats characterize as cages for migrant children were used by the Obama administration. They are sectioned-off, chain-link indoor pens where children who come to the border without adults or who are separated from adults in detention are temporarily housed. The children are divided by age and sex. When Vice President Mike Pence recently visited detention facilities at the border, journalists accompanying him witnessed migrant men crowded into fetid chain-link quarters. A year ago, Associated Press photographs showing young people in such enclosures were misrepresented online as depicting child detentions by Trump and denounced by some Democrats and activists as illustrating Trump's cruelty. In fact, the photos were taken in 2014 during the Obama administration. Many Democrats in the presidential campaign and Congress continue to exploit the "kids in cages" imagery without acknowledging Obama used the facilities, too. His administration built the McAllen, Texas, facility with chain-link holding areas in 2014. ___ HEALTH CARE SEN. BERNIE SANDERS of Vermont, Democratic presidential candidate: "'Medicare for All' would reduce overall health care spending in our country."   speech Wednesday. THE FACTS: That remains to be seen. Savings from Medicare for All are not a slam dunk. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in a report this year that total spending under a single-payer system, such as the one proposed by Sanders, "might be higher or lower than under the current system depending on the key features of the new system." Those features involve payment rates for hospitals and doctors, which are not fully spelled out by Sanders, as well as the estimated cost of generous benefits that include long-term care services and no copays and deductibles. Sanders' figure of $5 trillion over 10 years in health cost savings comes from a study by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. The lead author has been a political supporter of Sanders'. Sanders also cites a savings estimate of $2 trillion over 10 years taken from a study from the libertarian Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Virginia. But the author of that study says that Medicare for All advocates are mischaracterizing his conclusions. A report this year by the nonprofit Rand think tank estimated that Medicare for All would do the opposite of what Sanders is promising, modestly raising national health spending. Part of the reason is the generous benefits. Virtually free comprehensive medical care would lead to big increases in demand. The Rand study modeled a hypothetical scenario in which a plan similar to Sanders' legislation had taken effect this year. ___ TRUMP: "We are offering plans up to 60 percent cheaper than Obamacare."   North Carolina rally. THE FACTS: The bargain health insurance plans Trump talks about are cheaper because they skimp on benefits such as maternity or prescription drug coverage and do not guarantee coverage of preexisting conditions. The short-term plans that his administration began offering last year on the federal insurance marketplace provide up to 12 months of coverage and can be renewed for up to 36 months. Premiums for the plans are about one-third the cost of fuller insurance coverage. The health plan offerings are intended for people who want an individual health insurance policy but make too much money to qualify for subsides under the Affordable Care Act. The administration introduced the short-term plans, which undermine how the Obama health law is supposed to work, after failing to repeal much of that law. ___ TRUMP: "Patients with preexisting conditions are protected by Republicans much more so than protected by Democrats, who will never be able to pull it off."   North Carolina rally. THE FACTS: But Democrats did pull it off. Obama's health care law, the Affordable Care Act, requires insurers to take all applicants, regardless of medical history, and charge the same standard premiums to healthy people and those who had medical problems before or when they signed up. The Trump administration is pressing in court for full repeal of that law. Trump and other Republicans say they'll have a plan to preserve protections for people with preexisting conditions. The White House has provided no details. ___ AUTO INDUSTRY SEN. KAMALA HARRIS of California, Democratic presidential candidate: "Some estimate that as many as 700,000 autoworkers are going to lose their job before the end of the year."   remarks in July 12 radio interview. THE FACTS: This isn't happening. Harris mischaracterized the findings of a study that is also outdated. In July 2018 the Center for Automotive Research laid out a variety of scenarios for potential job losses across all U.S. industries touched by the auto business   not just autoworkers   if a number of new tariffs and policies that Trump threatened were enacted. The worst case was 750,000. But those hypothetical losses went well beyond autoworkers, to include workers at restaurants, retail stores and any business that benefits from the auto industry. In any event, the center revised its study in February 2019, with a worst-case scenario down to 367,000 job losses across all industries. And since then, the administration lifted tariffs on steel and aluminum products coming from Canada and Mexico, further minimizing the impact on the auto industry. The auto industry has grown under Obama and Trump both. Although it's facing a leveling off in demand, it still posts strong numbers. It is not at risk of the catastrophe Harris raises as a possibility   the loss of 3 in 4 autoworkers in the remainder of this year. ___ TRUMP: "They're coming in at a level that we haven't seen for decades. Car companies are coming in   Japanese car companies, in particular. ... Japan has 12 different companies building plants in Michigan, in Ohio, in North Carolina, in Pennsylvania. One is going to be announced in Florida. We are doing things that nobody thought were possible."   Cabinet meeting Tuesday. THE FACTS: There's no evidence that car companies are coming to the U.S. at a rate faster than in previous decades. Industry observers know of only a few Japanese automotive companies building or expanding factories in Michigan, Ohio, North Carolina or Pennsylvania   nowhere near a dozen. Federal statistics show that jobs in auto and parts manufacturing grew at a slower rate in the two-plus years since Trump took office than in Obama's last two years. Between January 2017, when Trump was inaugurated, and June of this year, the latest figures available, U.S. auto and parts makers added 41,900 jobs, or a 4.4% increase, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. But in the two years before Trump took office, the industry added 63,600 manufacturing jobs, a 7.1% increase. In Ohio, Honda has filed paperwork for a small expansion of its engine plant in Anna, Ohio, near Dayton, but also has announced production cuts without layoffs. A parts supplier announced plans last year to expand in Springfield, Ohio. In North Carolina, transmission maker Aisin in April announced plans to bolster manufacturing operations with 900 jobs by 2021, but gave few details. The only Japanese automakers building a new U.S. assembly plant are Toyota and Mazda, which are jointly constructing a factory in Alabama that will build SUVs. At least three parts companies have announced plans to build factories in Alabama to serve that facility. Also, spokesmen for German automakers Volkswagen AG, Daimler AG and BMW AG say they haven't been told of any coming new factory announcements. ___ Associated Press writers Tom Krisher in Detroit, Colleen Long, Josh Boak, Christopher Rugaber and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar in Washington, and Elliot Spagat in San Diego contributed to this report. ___ Find AP Fact Checks at http://apne.ws/2kbx8bd Follow @APFactCheck on Twitter: https://twitter.com/APFactCheck


When the warm summer and spring months arrive, lots of us reach into the back of the closet to fish out our favorite sandals. But if yours happen to be a pair of flip-flops, freeze right there. We have a few good reasons why you should stop wearing flip-flops right now. These simple sandals have been popular for decades, and they've been doing a number on our toesies for just as long. Don't get us wrong, we totally see the appeal of a comfy and simple shoe that you can just slide right on. Unfortunately, the simplicity of the shoe also makes it a foot doctor's nightmare. A gentle foot massage might be able to temporarily alleviate the pain, but the best option might be to stop wearing flip-flops entirely. While it's fine to wear them to the beach or in the shower at the gym, these floppy sandals leave your vulnerable feet open to all sorts of accidents and injuries. Scroll through below to learn why you should stop wearing flip-flops whenever possible. What Are Flip-Flops? What are flip-flops, exactly? Different people have different definitions, but if we're talking about the most dangerous shoe to wear out and about, we mean the most basic and simple type of flip-flop. These shoes generally have simple, flat foam soles with a pair of plastic straps that form the thong wrapping around the foot and between the toes. Why Are Flip-Flops Bad For You? #1: They Cause Bunions Bunions are painful, bony protrusions on your feet, usually right on the side of your foot below your big toe. You can also get "bunionettes" on the outside of your foot, by the pinkie. Both types of bunions are caused by pulling and stretching the ligaments of your foot . When the ligaments are misaligned, the little bones in your foot get pulled out of place and you end up with bunions. Flip-flops are a major culprit, because they create an unnaturally flat surface and force your ligaments and tendons to tug in the wrong spots. #2: They Don't Support Your Arches One of the biggest problems with flip-flops is that most of them have virtually zero arch support. Every foot has a bit of natural arch to it in the middle. Shoes with arch support inside carry the weight of your foot and preserve the shape of your arch. Without arch support, we get back to an earlier point. Your ligaments and tendons will start to tug in all the wrong directions to compensate. All that tugging on the ligaments translates to one thing: pain in your feet, which might trigger bunions, heel spurs, and plantar fasciitis . #3: They Let Fungus Fester If your flip-flops have a soft foam base, you are very likely looking at fungus city, especially if you ever wear them in the water. Take, for instance, the communal shower at the gym or the pool. You wear flip-flops to keep from catching fungus, but the fungus and bacteria get in anyway, and make a nice cozy home in the porous foam. Eventually, they get to your feet anyway! That doesn't mean you should stop wearing flip-flops in communal showers, it's just a good idea to keep them dry and clean, and replace them often . #4: They Make Blisters Erupt Blisters are a necessary evil for many shoe-wearing experiences. As we all know, shoes that you wear without socks will usually give you a few blisters at first, until you break them in. Flip-flops are different, especially the kind that have a plastic thong in the middle. A plastic thong can't be worn in like leather or fabric. It will simply keep rubbing at the tender skin between your toes (especially if you get your feet wet) and will give you a blister every single time. #5: They Hammer Your Toes Wearing a shoe without good support puts a lot of unnecessary stress on all parts of your foot. For instance, your toes can get all out of whack from two major factors: the lack of arch support, and the thong threaded between your big toe and your second. Flip-flops force your toes to curl and your tendons to tug. Over time, that can give you a condition called hammertoe , where one toe crosses over its neighbor. It's not pretty, and often requires surgery to fix. #6: They're A Stumbling Block A lot of middle schools and high schools actually ban flip-flops now , because they are such a hazard to kids' health. That's because it's incredibly easy to trip and fall while wearing these floppy shoes. It's just as easy for someone passing to step on your shoe and pull you up short. Basically, any shoe that doesn't fully stay on your foot is a recipe for twisted ankles, stubbed toes, and trip-and-fall accidents. #7: They Slow You Down Ever try to run in flip-flops? We don't recommend it. Running   or even just walking   in flip-flops will slow you right down, because it's hard to keep them on your feet as you move. You have to continuously grip and re-grip them with your toes to make progress, which means that they can be a serious liability if you need to move fast . #8: They Hurt Your Heels We all know the sound flip-flops make when you walk in them: "Slap-slap-slap." That's the sound of the soles hitting your heels, and your heels hitting the pavement, over and over again. Flip-flops basically force you to step in such a way that all your weight comes down hard on your heels . That makes them ache like heck, and the added pressure on the skin can also leads them to develop calluses and cracked skin   not a look anyone wants in sandal weather. Long story short? Flip-flops may have a place on the beach, but for running around town, only a sturdy shoe will do. Slideshow: How to keep your kids safe at the beach and pool this summer (Provided by Mom.me)


The Brewers are bringing top prospect Keston Hiura back to the majors, The Athletic's Robert Murray reports. In a corresponding move, the struggling Travis Shaw will head down to Triple-A. This will be Hiura's second stint in the major leagues, as he made his debut in a 17-game cameo for Milwaukee earlier this season while Shaw was on the IL with a wrist injury. During that brief time with the Brewers, Hiura lived up to his status as one of baseball's consensus top prospects, hitting .281/.333/.531 with five homers over 69 plate appearances. While Hiura struck out in 23 of those trips to the plate and benefited from a .361 BABIP, he was also doing damage when he did make strong contact, with a .369 xwOBA that exactly matched his .369 wOBA. Given his tendency to strike out and the fact that Hiura doesn't turn 23 until August, it may be a bit much to expect the youngster to continue being an above-average offensive producer for the remainder of the season (or as long as he's still on the 25-man roster). Yet it was clear that some type of upgrade was needed for Shaw, who has become a weak link on a Brewers team with postseason aspirations. His wrist problem, which cost him three weeks on the injured list, certainly could be a factor, though there isn't much to like about what Shaw has done at the plate this season. After hitting .258/.347/.497 with 63 homers over his first two seasons in Milwaukee, Shaw has managed only a .166/.278/.293 slash line and six home runs through 209 plate appearances this year. His power numbers and contact rates have cratered, while his strikeouts have gone through the roof, as Shaw's 33 percent strikeout rate and 13.4 percent swinging strike rate are far and away his career highs. Shaw still had two option years remaining, and was earning $4.675M this season in his first of three arbitration-eligible years. While it isn't a stretch to consider if Shaw could be a non-tender candidate this winter, there's still lots of time for him to get on track against Triple-A pitching and again contribute to the Brewers this season. While Hiura is certainly the Brew Crew's second baseman of the future and potentially the present, Shaw could again be an option at third base since Mike Moustakas is only signed through this season, as he and the Brewers share an $11M mutual option for 2020. Moustakas has been lacking in free agent suitors in each of the last two seasons, though one would think he'll decline his side of that option to again seek a multiyear commitment, given that the Moose is enjoying his finest season at the plate. Looking at the long term, even if Hiura spends the rest of the season on the Brewers' big-league roster, he won't amass enough major league service time to himself qualify for future Super Two status. Hiura has played exclusively as a second baseman during his young career, so his addition to the roster will almost mean that Moustakas will again be spending much of his time at the hot corner. Playing second base for the first time in his MLB career this season, Moustakas ended up acquitting himself decently well at the keystone (+1 Defensive Runs Saved, -1.6 UZR/150), and obviously the position switch had no impact on Moustakas' ability to hit.


MAROUSI, Greece   Business has been so brisk in the giant Kotsovolos appliance and electronics store in this upper-middle-class suburb of Athens that you might think a sale was on. But, no. It is panic buying, those who work here say. Increasingly concerned that greater economic trouble lies ahead of them, and limited in how much cash they can take out of banks, Greeks have been using their debit cards to buy ovens, refrigerators, dishwashers   anything tangible that can hold its value in troubled times. "We have sold so much," said Despina Drisi, who has worked in the store for 12 years. "We even sold display models. People have been pulling at my sleeves. We're spacing things out now to cover the holes on the shelves." To the casual observer, the bustle of everyday life looks unchanged here. Greeks, many of whom long ago traded in their cars for cheaper motor scooters, clog the streets at rush hour on their way to and from work. Tourists pack the Acropolis. Friends meet, greet and sit in cafes, looking for shady spots against the heat. But beneath the surface, Greeks are struggling with growing fear, the strange ramifications of closed banks and the mounting potential for much worse. They could face the unknown consequences of being pushed out of the eurozone within the next week if Greece and its creditors cannot come to an agreement. Some are watching television and checking their smartphones constantly. Others refuse to follow what is going on in Brussels at all. But either way, many are doing what they can to protect themselves financially, buying appliances and jewelry or even prepaying their taxes so they will have taken care of one financial obligation if they end up losing some of their savings to a bank failure, as happened to depositors in Cyprus under a bank rescue plan there in 2013. "Panicked doesn't begin to describe how people feel," said Antonis Mouzakis, an Athens accountant. "I have a huge number of customers wanting to file their taxes right here, right now, to have the tax calculated and paid instantly before a possible haircut. Even if the tax is 40 to 50 thousand euros, they pay it off in one go." A Greek jeweler, George Papalexis, said a customer had approached him on Wednesday wanting to buy a million euros   about $1.1 million   worth of merchandise. But Mr. Papalexis, the chief operating officer of Zolotas, said he had refused because he was more comfortable holding on to the jewels than having money in Greek banks. "I can't believe that there I was, turning away a million-dollar offer," he said. "But I had to turn down the deal. It's a measure of the risk we face." Mr. Mouzakis said that many companies were also trying to settle their debts quickly, not wanting to owe money if their deposits are hit in a deal to rescue Greek banks. Others do not want to accept payments for the same reason. When banks in Cyprus had to be bailed out in 2013, depositors with more than €100,000 lost about 40 percent of their money. But individuals, too, are doing what they can to protect themselves. At night, many of them are walking the city in search of A.T.M.s that have not been emptied of cash. Others are using computers to spread money to various accounts or to relatives, lowering the total in each account. With banks closed , Greeks are limited to withdrawals of €60, or $66, a day from A.T.M.s and cannot make international transactions, factors that have gutted some businesses already. The auction at the downtown fish market, where cash is mandatory, was sparsely attended Wednesday, leaving fishermen fretting. But there are more mundane problems, too. The A.T.M.s give out only €20 and €50 notes, and they appear to be running out of €20s. Stores are having an increasingly difficult time finding change. Some businesses have begun yet another round of layoffs. "My boss came in and said, 'We are all going to die,' " said a young woman who works for a small travel agency in Athens. "He gathered us all together, really, to tell us that." He then reduced her hours to two days a week, she said, adding that her boss "was completely, totally panicked." The agency has been unable to issue tickets this week because Greek travel agents have been blocked from the global ticketing system. Pharmacists began to feel the pinch almost immediately when the banks shut down, because most drugs are imported and they had no way to pay for them. Michalis Moschonas, an Athens pharmacist, said his customers had been concerned, if understanding, when he had to turn them away. He was also understanding, allowing many people who were unable to get enough cash to pay for their medicine to owe him money. "I have countless i.o.u.'s behind my counter," he said. A contractor at a Greek energy company, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said his firm had paid all its taxes for the year last week to whittle down the funds that could be subject to a deposit tax. "I'm even thinking about buying a car, although I don't need one, to get my cash balance lower," he said. "People want their money in physical assets, not in the bank." His mother, he said, asked him to help her open new accounts online at as many Greek banks as possible to divide her life's savings into smaller pieces. To some degree, the fear has prompted a kind of binge spending. Of course, millions of Greeks have nothing to spend after five years in which unemployment skyrocketed to more than 25 percent. But some who are unlikely to be troubled by losing a percentage of their bank deposits are spending, too. Vassilis Bekiaris, 29, said he knew two brothers who had gone on what was probably an ill-advised spending spree, fearing a cut to their savings. One who had just €1,000 in his account bought an iPhone. The other had €10,000 euros but, thinking he could lose 20 percent, bought €2,000 worth of clothes. "All they managed to do was prop up the economy a bit," Mr. Bekiaris said. While pensioners and others in need of cash struggled, some employers who were behind in paying their employees surprised them by digging into their safes and producing cash rather than risk losing money to the terms of a bank bailout. A few companies, prepared for the bank closings, were ready to pay cash to their grateful employees. The family-owned Petsas group, which manufactures a range of products from biodiesel to cotton clothing, paid all of its workers, about 130 people, in cash. "We didn't want them standing in lines for hours to get €60," said Vasilis Petsas, the head of the company. "It was a really nice surprise," said Effrosini Malamou, 23, an administrative assistant. Still, she could not get to her savings to pay for her vacation plans.


A new cocktail bar has opened for business in the neighborhood. Located at 174 Eighth Ave. in Chelsea, the new arrival is called Jungle Bird . Jungle Bird serves up a large selection of island-inspired cocktails and bites, with menu items ranging from papaya salad to dumplings to coconut curry hummus. On the cocktail menu , look for the Jungle Bird, available on tap, with rum, Campari, Contratto aperitif, pineapple and lime. With a four-star rating out of 13 reviews on Yelp so far, Jungle Bird has gotten a good response. Mike C., who was among the first Yelpers to review the new spot on May 20, wrote, "This is a nice new bar with a great food menu of mostly small snacks." And Maria T. wrote , "Lively atmosphere, beautiful decor and art and a friendly and knowledgeable bartender. Great drinks. Will definitely be back!" Head on over to check it out: Jungle Bird is open from 3 p.m. 2 a.m. on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Sunday and 3 p.m. 3 a.m. Thursday-Saturday. Want to keep your finger on the pulse of new businesses in New York City? Here's what else opened recently near you . This story was created automatically using local business data, then reviewed and augmented by an editor. Click here for more about what we're doing. Got thoughts? Go here to share your feedback.


Giants coach Pat Shurmur doesn't want to hear about a quarterback controversy. After rookie Daniel Jones put on a show in Thursday night's preseason opener, Shurmur was asked what he would say to fans who think it's time for Jones to replace Eli Manning . "I think, 'Slow your roll,'" Shurmur said. Manning went three-and-out on his only series, while Jones went 5-for-5 including a touchdown pass on his only series. Shurmur said it's too soon to anoint Jones. "This is just his first go around," Shurmur said of Jones. "I think he did a good job. As I mentioned, all along he has done nothing to disappoint us, and certainly when you take the team down the field and score a touchdown, that's a good start. It's something good to build on. We have a lot of time left before we start playing games. Nothing at this point has changed." Shurmur said Jones made some mistakes that the coaching staff noticed but fans and the media wouldn't. "He didn't motion the tight end across on the first play," Shurmur said. "Those types of things. Things that we see. As I mentioned, to the naked eye, you possibly didn't see." One preseason game is too soon to make any proclamations, but suffice to say that if Jones and Manning look in the next two preseason games like they looked in the first one, it's going to be awfully hard for Shurmur to slow down fans' desire to move on from Manning and see Jones as the Week One starter.


This article is a collaboration between The Times Magazine and the Center for Public Integrity , where R. Jeffrey Smith is the managing editor for national security. O n March 6, 2018, the grand ballroom at the Sphinx Club in Washington was packed with aerospace-industry executives waiting to hear from Michael D. Griffin. Weeks earlier, Secretary of Defense James Mattis named the 69-year-old Maryland native the Pentagon's under secretary for research and engineering, a job that comes with an annual budget of more than $17 billion. The dark-suited attendees at the McAleese/Credit Suisse Defense Programs Conference were eager to learn what type of work he would favor. The audience was already familiar with Griffin, an unabashed defender of American military and political supremacy who has bragged about being labeled an "unreconstructed cold warrior." With five master's degrees and a doctorate in aerospace engineering, he was the chief technology officer for President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (popularly known as Star Wars), which was supposed to shield the United States against a potential Russian attack by ballistic missiles looping over the North Pole. Over the course of his career that followed, he wrote a book on space vehicle design, ran a technology incubator funded by the C.I.A., directed NASA for four years and was employed as a senior executive at a handful of aerospace firms. Griffin was known as a scientific optimist who regularly called for "disruptive innovation" and who prized speed above all. He had repeatedly complained about the Pentagon's sluggish bureaucracy, which he saw as mired in legacy thinking. "This is a country that produced an atom bomb under the stress of wartime in three years from the day we decided to do it," he told a congressional panel last year. "This is a country that can do anything we need to do that physics allows. We just need to get on with it." Sign Up For the Morning Briefing Newsletter In recent decades, Griffin's predecessors had prioritized broad research into topics such as human-computer interaction, space communication and undersea warfare. But Griffin signaled an important shift, one that would have major financial consequences for the executives in attendance. "I'm sorry for everybody out there who champions some other high priority, some technical thing; it's not that I disagree with those," he told the room. "But there has to be a first, and hypersonics is my first." Griffin was referring to a revolutionary new type of weapon, one that would have the unprecedented ability to maneuver and then to strike almost any target in the world within a matter of minutes. Capable of traveling at more than 15 times the speed of sound, hypersonic missiles arrive at their targets in a blinding, destructive flash, before any sonic booms or other meaningful warning. So far, there are no surefire defenses. Fast, effective, precise and unstoppable   these are rare but highly desired characteristics on the modern battlefield. And the missiles are being developed not only by the United States but also by China, Russia and other countries. [ To follow the development of hypersonic missiles and other military technology , sign up for the weekly At War newsletter . ] Griffin is now the chief evangelist in Washington for hypersonics, and so far he has run into few political or financial roadblocks. Lawmakers have supported a significant expansion of federal spending to accelerate the delivery of what they call a "game-changing technology," a buzz phrase often repeated in discussions on hypersonics. America needs to act quickly, says James Inhofe, the Republican senator from Oklahoma who is chairman of the Armed Services Committee, or else the nation might fall behind Russia and China. Democratic leaders in the House and Senate are largely in agreement, though recently they've pressed the Pentagon for more information. (The Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed, a Democrat from Rhode Island, and House Chairman Adam Smith, the Democratic representative for Washington's ninth district, told me it might make sense to question the weapons' global impact or talk with Russia about the risks they create, but the priority in Washington right now is to get our versions built.) In 2018, Congress expressed its consensus in a law requiring that an American hypersonic weapon be operational by October 2022. This year, the Trump administration's proposed defense budget included $2.6 billion for hypersonics, and national security industry experts project that the annual budget will reach $5 billion by the middle of the next decade. The immediate aim is to create two deployable systems within three years. Key funding is likely to be approved this summer. The enthusiasm has spread to military contractors, especially after the Pentagon awarded the largest one, Lockheed Martin, more than $1.4 billion in 2018 to build missile prototypes that can be launched by Air Force fighter jets and B-52 bombers. These programs were just the beginning of what the acting defense secretary, Patrick M. Shanahan, described in December as the Trump administration's goal of "industrializing" hypersonic missile production. Several months later, he and Griffin created a new Space Development Agency of some 225 people, tasked with putting a network of sensors in low-earth orbit that would track incoming hypersonic missiles and direct American hypersonic attacks. This isn't the network's only purpose, but it will have "a war-fighting capability, should it come to that," Griffin said in March. Development of hypersonics is moving so quickly, however, that it threatens to outpace any real discussion about the potential perils of such weapons, including how they may disrupt efforts to avoid accidental conflict, especially during crises. There are currently no international agreements on how or when hypersonic missiles can be used, nor are there any plans between any countries to start those discussions. Instead, the rush to possess weapons of incredible speed and maneuverability has pushed the United States into a new arms race with Russia and China   one that could, some experts worry, upend existing norms of deterrence and renew Cold War-era tensions. Although hypersonic missiles can in theory carry nuclear warheads, those being developed by the United States will only be equipped with small conventional explosives. With a length between just five and 10 feet, weighing about 500 pounds and encased in materials like ceramic and carbon fiber composites or nickel-chromium superalloys, the missiles function like nearly invisible power drills that smash holes in their targets, to catastrophic effect. After their launch   whether from the ground, from airplanes or from submarines   they are pulled by gravity as they descend from a powered ascent, or propelled by highly advanced engines. The missiles' kinetic energy at the time of impact, at speeds of at least 1,150 miles per hour, makes them powerful enough to penetrate any building material or armored plating with the force of three to four tons of TNT. They could be aimed, in theory, at Russian nuclear-armed ballistic missiles being carried on trucks or rails. Or the Chinese could use their own versions of these missiles to target American bombers and other aircraft at bases in Japan or Guam. Or the missiles could attack vital land- or sea-based radars anywhere, or military headquarters in Asian ports or near European cities. The weapons could even suddenly pierce the steel decks of one of America's 11 multibillion-dollar aircraft carriers, instantly stopping flight operations, a vulnerability that might eventually render the floating behemoths obsolete. Hypersonic missiles are also ideal for waging a decapitation strike   assassinating a country's top military or political officials. "Instant leader-killers," a former Obama administration White House official, who asked not to be named, said in an interview. Within the next decade, these new weapons could undertake a task long imagined for nuclear arms: a first strike against another nation's government or arsenals, interrupting key chains of communication and disabling some of its retaliatory forces, all without the radioactive fallout and special condemnation that might accompany the detonation of nuclear warheads. That's why a National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine report said in 2016 that hypersonics aren't "simply evolutionary threats" to the United States but could in the hands of enemies "challenge this nation's tenets of global vigilance, reach and power." The arrival of such fast weaponry will dangerously compress the time during which military officials and their political leaders   in any country   can figure out the nature of an attack and make reasoned decisions about the wisdom and scope of defensive steps or retaliation. And the threat that hypersonics pose to retaliatory weapons creates what scholars call "use it or lose it" pressures on countries to strike first during a crisis. Experts say that the missiles could upend the grim psychology of Mutual Assured Destruction, the bedrock military doctrine of the nuclear age that argued globe-altering wars would be deterred if the potential combatants always felt certain of their opponents' devastating response. And yet decision makers seem to be ignoring these risks. Unlike with previous leaps in military technology   such as the creation of chemical and biological weapons and ballistic missiles with multiple nuclear warheads   that ignited international debate and eventually were controlled through superpower treaty negotiations, officials in Washington, Moscow and Beijing haven't seriously considered any sort of accord limiting the development or deployment of hypersonic technology. In the United States, the State Department's arms-control bureau has an office devoted to emerging security challenges, but hypersonic missiles aren't one of its core concerns. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's deputies say they primarily support making the military's arsenal more robust, an unusual stance for a department tasked with finding diplomatic solutions to global problems. This position worries arms-control experts like Thomas M. Countryman, a career diplomat for 35 years and former assistant secretary of state in the Obama administration. "This is not the first case of a new technology proceeding through research, development and deployment far faster than the policy apparatus can keep up," says Countryman, who is now chairman of the Arms Control Association. He cites examples of similarly "destabilizing technologies" in the 1960s and 1970s, when billions of dollars in frenzied spending on nuclear and chemical arms was unaccompanied by discussion of how the resulting dangers could be minimized. Countryman wants to see limitations placed on the number of hypersonic missiles that a country can build or on the type of warheads that they can carry. He and others worry that failing to regulate these weapons at the international level could have irreversible consequences. "It is possible," the United Nations Office of Disarmament Affairs said in a February report, that "in response [to] the deployment of hypersonic weapons," nations fearing the destruction of their retaliatory-strike capability might either decide to use nuclear weapons under a wider set of conditions or simply place "nuclear forces on higher alert levels" as a matter of routine. The report lamented that these "ramifications remain largely unexamined and almost wholly undiscussed." [ Only 5 Nations Can Hit Any Placeon Earth With a Missile. For Now. ] So why haven't the potential risks of this revolution attracted more attention? One reason is that for years the big powers have cared mostly about numerical measures of power   who has more warheads, bombers and missiles   and negotiations have focused heavily on those metrics. Only occasionally has their conversation widened to include the issue of strategic stability, a topic that encompasses whether specific weaponry poses risks of inadvertent war. An aerospace engineer for the military for more than three decades, Daniel Marren runs one of the world's fastest wind tunnels   and thanks to hypersonics research, his lab is in high demand. But finding it takes some time: When I arrived at the Air Force's White Oak testing facility, just north of Silver Spring, Md., the private security guards only vaguely gestured toward some World War II-era military research buildings down the road, at the edge of the Food and Drug Administration's main campus. The low-slung structure that houses Marren's tunnel looks as if it could pass for an aged elementary school, except that it has a seven-story silver sphere sticking out of its east side, like a World's Fair exhibit in the spot where an auditorium should be. The tunnel itself, some 40 feet in length and five feet in diameter, looks like a water main; it narrows at one end before emptying into the silver sphere. A column of costly high-tech sensors is grafted onto the piping where a thick window has been cut into its midsection. Marren seemed both thrilled and harried by the rising tempo at his laboratory in recent months. A jovial 55-year-old who speaks carefully but excitedly about his work, he showed me a red brick structure on the property with some broken windows. It was built, he said, to house the first of nine wind tunnels that have operated at the test site, one that was painstakingly recovered in 1948 from Peenemünde, the coastal German village where Wernher von Braun worked on the V-2 rocket used to kill thousands of Londoners in World War II. American military researchers had a hard time figuring out how to reassemble and operate it, so they recruited some German scientists stateside. As we entered the control room of the building that houses the active tunnel, Marren mentioned casually that the roof was specially designed to blow off easily if anything goes explosively awry. Any debris would head skyward, and the engineers, analysts and visiting Air Force generals monitoring the wind tests could survive behind the control room's reinforced-concrete walls. Inside the main room, Marren   dressed in a technologist's polo shirt   explained that during the tests, the tunnel is first rolled into place on a trolley over steel rails in the floor. Then an enormous electric burner is ignited beneath it, heating the air inside to more than 3,000 degrees, hot enough to melt steel. The air is then punched by pressures 1,000 times greater than normal at one end of the tunnel and sucked at the other end by a vacuum deliberately created in the enormous sphere. That sends the air roaring down the tunnel at up to 18 times the speed of sound   fast enough to traverse more than 30 football fields in the time it takes to blink. Smack in the middle of the tunnel during a test, attached to a pole capable of changing its angle in fractions of a second, is a scale model of the hypersonics prototype. That is, instead of testing the missiles by flying them through the air outdoors, the tunnel effectively makes the air fly past them at the same incredible pace. For the tests, the models are coated with a paint that absorbs ultraviolet laser light as it warms, marking the spots on their ceramic skin where frictional heat may threaten the structure of the missile; engineers will then need to tweak the designs either to resist that heat or shunt it elsewhere. The aim, Marren explains, is to see what will happen when the missiles plow through the earth's dense atmosphere on their way to their targets. It's challenging work, replicating the stresses these missiles would endure while whizzing by at 30 times the speed of a civilian airliner, miles above the clouds. Their sleek, synthetic skin expands and deforms and kicks off a plasma like the ionized gas formed by superheated stars, as they smash the air and try to shed all that intense heat. The tests are fleeting, lasting 15 seconds at most, which require the sensors to record their data in thousandths of a nanosecond. That's the best any such test facility can do, according to Marren, and it partly accounts for the difficulty that defense researchers have had in producing hypersonics, even after about $2 billion-worth of federal investment before this year. Nonetheless, Marren, who has worked at the tunnel since 1984, is optimistic that researchers will be able to deliver a working missile soon. He and his team are operating at full capacity, with hundreds of test runs scheduled this year to measure the ability of various prototype missiles to withstand the punishing friction and heat of such rapid flight. "We have been prepared for this moment for some time, and it's great to lean forward," Marren says. The faster that weapons systems can operate, he adds, the better. Last year, the nation was confronted with a brief reminder of how Cold War-era nuclear panic played out, after a state employee in Hawaii mistakenly sent out an emergency alert declaring that a "ballistic missile threat" was "inbound." The message didn't specify what kind of missile   and, in fact, the United States Army Space and Missile Defense Command at two sites in Alaska and California may have some capability to shoot down a few incoming ballistic missiles   but panicked Hawaii residents didn't feel protected. They reacted by careening cars into one another on highways, pushing their children into storm drains for protection and phoning their loved ones to say goodbye   until a second message, 38 minutes later, acknowledged it was an error. Hypersonics pose a different threat from ballistic missiles, according to those who have studied and worked on them, because they could be maneuvered in ways that confound existing methods of defense and detection. Not to mention, unlike most ballistic missiles, they would arrive in under 15 minutes   less time than anyone in Hawaii or elsewhere would need to meaningfully react. How fast is that, really? An object moving through the air produces an audible shock wave   a sonic boom   when it reaches about 760 miles per hour. This speed of sound is also called Mach 1, after the Austrian physicist Ernst Mach. When a projectile flies faster than Mach's number, it travels at supersonic speed   a speed faster than sound. Mach 2 is twice the speed of sound; Mach 3 is three times the speed of sound, and so on. When a projectile reaches a speed faster than Mach 5, it's said to travel at hypersonic speed. One of the two main hypersonic prototypes now under development in the United States is meant to fly at speeds between Mach 15 and Mach 20, or more than 11,400 miles per hour. This means that when fired by the U.S. submarines or bombers stationed at Guam, they could in theory hit China's important inland missile bases, like Delingha, in less than 15 minutes. President Vladimir Putin has likewise claimed that one of Russia's new hypersonic missiles will travel at Mach 10, while the other will travel at Mach 20. If true, that would mean a Russian aircraft or ship firing one of them near Bermuda could strike the Pentagon, some 800 miles away, in five minutes. China, meanwhile, has flight-tested its own hypersonic missiles at speeds fast enough to reach Guam from the Chinese coastline within minutes. One concept now being pursued by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency uses a conventional missile launched from air platforms to loft a smaller, hypersonic glider on its journey, even before the missile reaches its apex. The glider then flies unpowered toward its target. The deadly projectile might ricochet downward, nose tilted up, on layers of atmosphere   the mesosphere, then the stratosphere and troposphere   like an oblate stone on water, in smaller and shallower skips, or it might be directed to pass smoothly through these layers. In either instance, the friction of the lower atmosphere would finally slow it enough to allow a steering system to maneuver it precisely toward its target. The weapon, known as Tactical Boost Glide, is scheduled to be dropped from military planes during testing next year. Under an alternative approach, a hypersonic missile would fly mostly horizontally under the power of a "scramjet," a highly advanced, fanless engine that uses shock waves created by its speed to compress incoming air in a short funnel and ignite it while passing by (in roughly one two-thousandths of a second, according to some accounts). With its skin heated by friction to as much as 5,400 degrees, its engine walls would be protected from burning up by routing the fuel through them, an idea pioneered by the German designers of the V-2 rocket. The unusual trajectories of these missiles would allow them to approach their targets at roughly 12 to 50 miles above the earth's surface. That's below the altitude at which ballistic missile interceptors   such as the costly American Aegis ship-based system and the Thaad ground-based system   are now designed to typically operate, yet above the altitude that simpler air defense missiles, like the Patriot system, can reach. Officials will have trouble even knowing where a strike would land. Although the missiles' launch would probably be picked up by infrared-sensing satellites in its first few moments of flight, Griffin says they would be roughly 10 to 20 times harder to detect than incoming ballistic missiles as they near their targets. They would zoom along in the defensive void, maneuvering unpredictably, and then, in just a few final seconds of blindingly fast, mile-per-second flight, dive and strike a target such as an aircraft carrier from an altitude of 100,000 feet. During their flight, the perimeter of their potential landing zone could be about as big as Rhode Island. Officials might sound a general alarm, but they'd be clueless about exactly where the missiles were headed. "We don't have any defense that could deny the employment of such a weapon against us," Gen. John E. Hyten, commander of United States Strategic Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee in March 2018. The Pentagon is just now studying what a hypersonic attack might look like and imagining how a defensive system might be created; it has no architecture for it, and no firm sense of the costs. Developing these new weapons hasn't been easy. A 2012 test was terminated when the skin peeled off a hypersonic prototype, and another self-destructed when it lost control. A third hypersonic test vehicle was deliberately destroyed when its boosting missile failed in 2014. Officials at Darpa acknowledge they are still struggling with the composite ceramics they need to protect the missiles' electronics from intense heating; the Pentagon decided last July to ladle an extra $34.5 million into this effort this year. The task of conducting realistic flight tests also poses a challenge. The military's principal land-based site for open-air prototype flights   a 3,200-acre site stretching across multiple counties in New Mexico   isn't big enough to accommodate hypersonic weapons. So fresh testing corridors are being negotiated in Utah that will require a new regional political agreement about the noise of trailing sonic booms. Scientists still aren't sure how to accumulate all the data they need, given the speed of the flights. The open-air flight tests can cost up to $100 million. The most recent open-air hypersonic-weapon test was completed by the Army and the Navy in October 2017, using a 36,000-pound missile to launch a glider from a rocky beach on the western shores of Kauai, Hawaii, toward Kwajalein Atoll, 2,300 miles to the southwest. The 9 p.m. flight created a trailing sonic boom over the Pacific, which topped out at an estimated 175 decibels, well above the threshold of causing physical pain. The effort cost $160 million, or 6 percent of the total hypersonics budget proposed for 2020. In March 2018, Vladimir Putin, in the first of several speeches designed to rekindle American anxieties about a foreign missile threat, boasted that Russia had two operational hypersonic weapons: the Kinzhal, a fast, air-launched missile capable of striking targets up to 1,200 miles away; and the Avangard, designed to be attached to a new Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile before maneuvering toward its targets. Russian media have claimed that nuclear warheads for the weapons are already being produced and that the Sarmat missile itself has been flight-tested roughly 3,000 miles across Siberia. (Russia has also said it is working on a third hypersonic missile system, designed to be launched from submarines.) American experts aren't buying all of Putin's claims. "Their test record is more like ours," said an engineer working on the American program. "It's had a small number of flight-test successes." But Pentagon officials are convinced that Moscow's weapons will soon be a real threat. Analysts say the Chinese are even further along than the Russians, partly because Beijing has sought to create hypersonic missiles with shorter ranges that don't have to endure high temperatures as long. Many of their tests have involved a glide vehicle. Last August, a contractor for the Chinese space program claimed that it successfully flight-tested a gliding hypersonic missile for slightly more than six minutes. It supposedly reached a speed exceeding Mach 5 before landing in its target zone. Other Chinese hypersonic missile tests have reached speeds almost twice as fast. And it's not just Russia, China and the United States that are interested in fast-flying military power drills. France and India have active hypersonics development programs, and each is working in partnership with Russia, according to a 2017 report by the Rand Corp., a nonpartisan research organization. Australia, Japan and the European Union have either civilian or military hypersonics research underway, the report said, partly because they are still tantalized by the prospect of making super-speedy airplanes large enough to carry passengers across the globe in mere hours. But Japan's immediate effort is aimed at making a weapon that will be ready for testing by 2025. This is not the first time the United States or others have ignored risks while rushing toward a new, apparently magical solution to a military threat or shortcoming. During the Cold War, America and Russia competed fiercely to threaten each other's vital assets with bombers that took hours to cross oceans and with ballistic missiles that could reach their targets in 30 minutes. Ultimately, each side accumulated more than 31,000 warheads (even though the detonations of just 100 weapons would have sparked a severe global famine and stripped away significant protections against ultraviolet radiation). Eventually the fever broke, partly because of the Soviet Union's dissolution, and the two nations reduced their arsenals through negotiations to about 6,500 nuclear warheads apiece. Since then, cycles of intense arms racing have restarted whenever one side has felt acutely disadvantaged or spied a potential exit from what the political scientist Robert Jervis once described as the "overwhelming nature" of nuclear destruction, a circumstance that we've been involuntarily and resentfully hostage to for the past 70 years. [ Putin Warns That Russia Is Developing 'Invincible' Hypersonic Missiles ] Trump officials in particular have resisted policies that support Mutual Assured Destruction, the idea that shared risk can lead to stability and peace. John Bolton, the national security adviser, was a key architect in 2002 of America's withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia, which limited both nations' ability to try to block ballistic missiles. He asserted that freeing the United States of those restrictions would enhance American security, and if the rest of the world was static, his prediction might have come true. But Russia started its hypersonics program to ensure it could get around any American ballistic missile defenses. "Nobody wanted to listen to us" about the strategic dangers of abandoning the treaty, Putin said last year with an aggressive flourish as he displayed videos and animations of his nation's hypersonic missiles. "So listen now." But not much listening is going on in either country. In January, the Trump administration released an updated missile-defense strategy that explicitly calls for limiting mutual vulnerability by defeating enemy "offensive missiles prior to launch." The administration also continues to eschew any new limits on its own missiles, arguing that past agreements lulled America into a dangerous post-Cold War "holiday," as a senior State Department official described it. The current administration's lack of interest in regulating hypersonics isn't that different from its predecessor's. Around 2010, President Obama privately "made it clear that he wanted better options to hold North Korean missiles" at risk, a former senior adviser said, and some military officials said hypersonic weapons might be suitable for this. About that same time, the most recent nuclear arms reduction agreement with Russia deliberately excluded any constraints on hypersonic weapons. Then, three years ago, a New York-based group called the Lawyers Committee on Nuclear Policy, acting in conjunction with other nonprofits committed to disarmament, called on the president to head off a hypersonic competition and its anticipated drain on future federal budgets by exploring a joint moratorium with China and Russia on testing. The idea was never taken up. The Obama administration's inaction helped open the door to the 21st-century hypersonic contest America finds itself in today. "We always do these things in isolation, without thinking about what it means for the big powers   for Russia and China   who are bats--t paranoid" about a potential quick, pre-emptive American attack, the adviser said, expressing regret about how the issue was handled during Obama's tenure. While it might not be too late to change course, history shows that stopping an arms race is much harder than igniting one. And Washington at the moment is still principally focused on "putting a weapon on a target," as a longtime congressional staff member put it, rather than the reaction this capability inspires in an adversary. Griffin even projects an eventual American victory in this race: In April 2018, he said the best answer to the Chinese and Russian hypersonic programs is "to hold their assets at risk with systems similar to but better than what they have fielded." Invoking the mantra of military scientists throughout time, Griffin added that the country must "see their hand and raise them one." The world will soon find out what happens now that the military superpowers have decided to go all in. R. Jeffrey Smith has won a Pulitzer Prize and a National Magazine Award and is managing editor for national security at the Center for Public Integrity. Jeffrey Stern and Matt Stroud contributed research. Sign up for our newsletter to get the best of At War delivered to your inbox every week. For more coverage of conflict, visit nytimes.com/atwar .


Australian scientists on Tuesday forecast a "substantial" El Nino weather phenomenon for 2015, potentially spelling deadly and costly climate extremes, after officially declaring its onset in the tropical Pacific. El Nino had been expected last year when record-breaking temperatures made 2014 the hottest in more than a century. The Australian Bureau of Meteorology said while the thresholds were not met until now it was expected to be a significant event. The Japan Meteorological Agency also confirmed the phenomenon had begun and forecast it would continue into late 2015. "There's always a little bit of doubt when it comes to intensity forecasts, but across the models as a whole we'd suggest that this will be quite a substantial El Nino event," David Jones, from the bureau's climate information services branch said. "Certainly the models aren't predicting a weak event. They are predicting a moderate-to-strong El Nino event. So this is a proper El Nino event, this is not a weak one or a near miss as we saw last year." The El Nino phenomenon -- which is associated with drought conditions in Australia -- can cause havoc for farmers and global agricultural markets, hitting economies heavily dependent on the land. The last El Nino five years ago had a major impact with monsoons in Southeast Asia, droughts in southern Australia, the Philippines and Ecuador, blizzards in the United States, heatwaves in Brazil and killer floods in Mexico. It occurs when the trade winds that circulate over waters in the tropical Pacific start to weaken and sea surface temperatures rise. - Severe drought - US officials announced earlier this year that the long-awaited El Nino had arrived, but the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration described it as of "weak strength". Australian scientists said models were now showing it was likely to see an increased intensity from about September and have potential global impacts. "Last year we saw some indices, such as the sea surface temperatures at times exceed El Nino thresholds... but we didn't see them all coming together at the same time or we didn't see it sustained," Jones explained. He said this year's pattern could create drier conditions in Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and parts of Southeast Asia. In the past it has caused heavier-than-normal rainfall in the eastern Pacific and South America -- raising the spectre of floods and landslides, while the southwest United States and southern Africa tend to be drier. An El Nino is potentially a bad sign for large swathes of Australia, including the states of Queensland and New South Wales, which are already in the grip of severe drought. Neil Plummer, the bureau's assistant director for climate information services, said it was often associated with below average rainfall across eastern Australia and warmer temperatures in the southern half over the hottest months. "The onset of El Nino in Australia in 2015 is a little earlier than usual," he said, adding that this was the first such phenomenon in the tropical Pacific since March 2010. "Prolonged El Nino-like conditions have meant that some areas are more vulnerable to the impact of warmer temperatures and drier conditions." El Nino is forecast to strengthen during the southern hemisphere winter but while the event increases the risk of drought, it does not guarantee it -- with only 17 of the 26 El Nino events since 1900 resulting in widespread drought in Australia. On the upside, the bureau said it would expect the tropical cyclone season to be below average for Australia. "Every El Nino is different and we know that some years like 1972, 1982 and 1994 really fit the stereotype strongly, severe drought, very hot daytime temperatures, bushfire activity and so on," said Jones. "But not every El Nino event follows that pattern."


KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) Adalberto Mondesi and Terrance Gore used their speed to help the Kansas City Royals rally for a win. Mondesi and Jorge Soler had consecutive one-out doubles in the eighth inning to tie it, and pinch-runner Gore stole third and scored the go-ahead run on Cheslor Cuthbert's ensuing single to lead the Royals to a 3-2 victory over the Detroit Tigers on Tuesday night. Kansas City manager Ned Yost credited Mondesi for ''a hustle double'' - for his third hit of the game - to start the rally. He then scored on Soler's hit off Victor Alcantara (2-1). Gore ran for Soler, stole third and scored on Cuthbert's single between three fielders in right field to give the Royals their first lead of the game. ''Cuthbert got a break on that one, hit a pop-up into no-man's land,'' Yost said. ''That's the first break we've caught in a while, but I'll take it.'' Detroit manager Ron Gardenhire agreed with Yost's assessment of the go-ahead run. ''I guess it's no-man's land,'' Gardenhire said. ''Somebody has to take charge on the ball. With us playing the infield in, it bloops out there. The ball landed and that was just a break for them.'' It was the first time all season the Kansas City won when trailing after six innings. Mondesi had rounded first aggressively on his first two hits before heading back to the bag. With his club down a run, he didn't hesitate on his last hit. ''Every time I hit the ball I run hard,'' Mondesi said. ''When I hit it I saw the left fielder was in the gap, so I thought I had a chance. I just ran hard.'' Scott Barlow (2-2) pitched a scoreless eighth inning to get the win, and Ian Kennedy got the last three outs for his fifth save. The Tigers' bullpen wasted a brilliant effort from Spencer Turnbull. He scattered four hits and two walks with five strikeouts over six innings. It was only the third time in 14 starts that Turnbull had not allowed a run. Jakob Junis had a quality start for Kansas City, allowing two runs and five hits - including solo homers by Nicholas Castellanos and Brandon Dixon - with five strikeouts in seven innings. ''We had a pretty good game plan and we executed it,'' Junis said. ''We had a couple of mistakes, but luckily they were solos. That kept us in the game. I wanted to challenge them. I got behind a couple of times. I didn't want to put anybody on with a free base. Those were huge.'' The Tigers got to Junis in the first on a 427-foot home run by Castellanos to left-center. It was Castellanos' 100th career homer, all with the Tigers. It marked the ninth time in 14 starts that Junis gave up a run in the first inning. Dixon hit a 447-foot homer in the fourth, into the fountains 20 feet beyond where Castellanos' homer traveled, to put the Tigers up 2-0. ''(Junis) made some mistakes, center-cut two fastballs, but he did an awesome job of keeping us in the game,'' Yost said. ''He gave us an opportunity to come back and win the game.'' Following Turnbull's departure, Ryan O'Hearn led off the seventh with his sixth home run of the season. He broke an 0-for-15 slump with his 439-foot blast to right. TRAINER'S ROOM Royals 3B Hunter Dozier was eligible to come off the 10-day injured list, but he is not close to being ready. He's been on the IL since June 3, retroactive to May 31. Manager Ned Yost said, ''We're going to be working him back into it, making sure everything is functional and feeling good. We've got to make sure that he's healthy, 100 percent. I don't know if we'll want to send him out on a rehab. When he's ready to go we'll make that decision.'' Tigers: SS Niko Goodrum was removed from the game following the top of the third after he fouled a pitch off his knee. He left with a right knee contusion. He finished the at-bat with a strikeout and was replaced by Gordon Beckham in the bottom of the third. UP NEXT The Tigers will send LHP Daniel Norris (2-5, 4.60 ERA) to the mound in the second game of the series. The Royals will counter with LHP Danny Duffy (3-3, 4.68 ERA). Duffy was hit on the right kneecap in his last start against Boston. The line drive bounced to third for the final out of the second inning. He came back out for the third but retired just one of six batters he faced in the inning before being pulled. --- More AP baseball coverage: www.apnews.com/MLB and www.twitter.com/AP-Sports


Citywide Looking to chow down on some Thai fare? A new spot has you covered. The fresh arrival to SoMa, called Sun & Moon , is located at 415 Brannan St., in the space formerly occupied by Koh Samui & The Monkey. Sun & Moon serves up Thai classics, including fresh spring rolls, seafood soup and stir-fried noodles, along with street food fare such as braised beef in massaman curry. For those craving ramen, menu options include Tokyo tonkotsu, spicy miso and a vegan version. As we previously reported , the restaurant's new owners are Nutnicha Sirisoonthorn and Atthapon Inkhong, according to a liquor license application. Sun & Moon has already attracted fans thus far, with a five-star rating out of five reviews on Yelp. Brian J., who reviewed the new spot on July 17, wrote, "Spectacular! They have elevated Thai street food to haute cuisine. ... So many great choices on the menu." And Celine W. added , "Slightly pricey for a lunch spot so only four stars; however, the food is tasty. I ordered the pad see ew with chicken and it is delicious and flavorful and cooked to perfection. Everything coming out of the kitchen looks delicious." Interested? Stop by to welcome the new business to the neighborhood. Sun & Moon is open from 11 a.m. 2:30 p.m. and 5 10 p.m. on weekdays. (It's closed on weekends.) Want to keep your finger on the pulse of new businesses in San Francisco? Here's what else opened recently near you . This story was created automatically using local business data, then reviewed and augmented by an editor. Click here for more about what we're doing. Got thoughts? Go here to share your feedback.


Crystal Palace travel to Cardiff on Saturday afternoon, as they look to make it three wins from their last five games. The Eagles are assured of Premier League survival this season, having secured their status earlier this month. However Cardiff are still battling relegation, and a win for the south Londoners at the Cardiff City Stadium would seal their hosts' relegation to the Championship. Manager Roy Hodgson is without four players, as Mamadou Sakho, Pape Souare, James Tomkins and Jeffrey Schlupp all out injured for the remainder of the season. However there are no fresh injury concerns for Palace manager Roy Hodgson, who will be looking for a win this weekend. Here's a look at Hodgson's best available Crystal Palace lineup to face Cardiff on Saturday. Goalkeeper and Defenders Vicente Guaita (GK) - Guaita will once again start in goal, his 23rd appearance of the season. Since assuming the number one spot the Spaniard has been outstanding, keeping seven league clean sheets to go level with the likes of David de Gea . Aaron Wan-Bissaka (RB) - In 37 appearances this season, Wan-Bissaka has had a stunning breakthrough season with the Eagles. His superb campaign was acknowledged earlier this week, as he won the club's Player of the Season and the Players' Player of the Season awards. Martin Kelly (CB) - Kelly should make up one half of the centre-back partnership as usual, as he continues to start at the back. Though his 18 appearances mean he's played less than anyone else in this defence, he remains a key part of the Eagles' back line. Scott Dann (CB) - It should be Dann who is chosen to pair up with Kelly, as he plays for just the 13th time this season. The 32-year-old has also been an asset at the back for Hodgson, and will hope to help the south Londoners register their 13th clean sheet of the Premier League season. Patrick van Aanholt (LB) - It will be Van Aanholt to play at left back, as the Dutchman completes Palace's back four. The 28-year-old has three goals and two assists this season, as a goal from him on Saturday could help relegate a team from the Premier League for the fourth time. Midfielders James McArthur (RM) - McArthur should be deployed as a right midfielder at the Cardiff City Stadium, as he has been so often this season. The Scottish midfielder has played 38 times throughout the campaign, amassing three goals and five assists in the process. Luka Milivojevic (CM) - Crystal Palace's captain and top goalscorer this season, Milivojevic will sit at the heart of the midfield on Saturday. The Serbian has led by example throughout the campaign, with 12 goals and three assists for the Eagles. Cheikhou Kouyate (CM) - Kouyate will play alongside Milivojevic in south Wales, as he makes his 37th appearance of the season. Since signing from London rivals West Ham in the summer, the Senegalese has settled well into life in south London and has flourished under Hodgson. Max Meyer (LM) -  Meyer should play to the left of Kouyate and make up Palace's midfield this weekend. The German has made 34 appearances since joining from Bundesliga side Schalke , as he prepares to feature for the fourth league game in a row for the Eagles. Forwards Wilfried Zaha (FW) - It will be a momentous game for Zaha , who returns to Cardiff for the first time since he spent time on loan there back in 2014. The Ivorian forward has been in brilliant form recently, with six goals and five assists in his last 15 league appearances. Christian Benteke (FW) -  Benteke should partner Zaha up front on Saturday, as he hopes to replicate his performance against Arsenal . After spending the majority of the season on the sidelines with a knee injury, the Belgian got a goal and an assist in the 3-2 win last month .


If the way to a man's heart is through his stomach, then the way to a home buyer's wallet may be through the kitchen. A new report from real-estate firm Zillow found that home listings touting premium kitchen features sold for 30% or more above the expected price. To complete the analysis, Zillow examined the listing descriptions for 4.6 million home sales across the country that were on the market in 2017 and 2018, identifying specific features that led to a higher sales price or faster sale. The biggest money-making features were steam ovens, wall ovens that pump in steam to cook food in a healthier manner. These netted a 34% sales premium, higher than any other feature. Of the 10 home features that generated the biggest boost in the home's sales price, six were kitchen-related. These amenities included professional-grade appliances (32% premium) and wine cellars (31%), and "pot fillers," attachments that extend a faucet so it's easier to put water into a big pot (28%). Money-making features that weren't specific to food and drink included steam showers, a "garage studio" and heated floors. Home feature Sales premium Steam oven 34% Professional appliance 32% Wine cellar 31% Steam shower 31% Pot filler faucet 28% Shed/Garage studio 27% Heated floor 26% Waterfall countertop 26% Outdoor kitchen 25% Prep sink 24.1% Just because properties sold for more than expected doesn't mean they sold faster. In fact, homes with steam ovens were the slowest to sell, taking 22 days longer than similar homes in the same market and price tier. This, Zillow said, is an indication that certain amenities may appeal to a very niche audience   but one that's willing to pay more for homes that fit their vision. Generally, faster sales were associated with properties that had features that have been popularized by remodeling shows on television, such as open shelving (11 days faster than expected) and subway tile (10 days faster). Related video: Projects that will help you sell your home faster (provided by Southern Living) Also see: Why so many property listings advertised as 'bargains' sell above the asking price For buyers of starter homes, a slightly different set of amenities had more appeal. The No. 1 feature among these properties were free-standing bathtubs   properties with these sold for a whopping 59% above asking price. The " Chip and Joanna Gaines Effect "   a reference to the hosts of the HGTV show "Fixer Upper"   is also still in full-swing : Craftsman features prompted starter-level homes to sell for 38% above their expected price. Other popular features in starter homes include pizza ovens (47% premium) and coffered ceilings (32% premium). Home feature Sales premium for starter homes Free-standing bathtub 59% Pot filler 49% Wine cellar 47% Pizza oven 47% Solar panel 40% Prep sink 39% Craftsman 38% Dual range oven 36% Coffered ceiling 32% Mid-century 32% These amenities, however, don't boost a home's selling price singlehandedly. Indeed, most home improvement projects don't even recoup their full cost through a higher resale value. Rather, these features   when identified in the home's listing description   can act as a signal to buyers that the property is in good condition. "If you have these features, flaunt them," said Skylar Olsen, director of economic research at Zillow. "Having a steam oven, a heated floor or other luxury features in the home is a signal that there is more than the home's basic features at play. These homes are special. They likely come with an elevated design sense and the extra touches valued by home shoppers who can afford the best."


If you have young children in daycare or school, then you are familiar with pink eye. This contagious eye infection is the most common type of eye infection, but at times it can be difficult to tell if it's something more. While some infections like pink eye can resolve on their own, others can cause permanent damage and require immediate treatment. According to the American Academy of Ophthalmology, almost one million people seek treatment for an eye infection each year. Common eye infections Conjunctivitis (pink eye) refers to the inflammation or infection of the conjunctiva, the clear membrane that lines the eyelid. Most cases are viral and resolve on their own. If the infection is bacterial, you will require antibiotic eye drops. If you are experiencing eye redness and discharge, here are pink eye symptoms you should know . Blepharitis is an inflammation of the eyelid and can be caused by a bacterial infection. While it does not affect vision, it can be quite uncomfortable. Iritis refers to inflammation of the iris or colored part of your eye. It can be caused by the shingles virus. Keratitis is an infection of the cornea , the clear covering over your pupil and iris. Infectious keratitis can be caused by bacteria, viruses, parasites, and fungi. While it is treatable, it can cause permanent vision impairment if left untreated. Endophthalmitis is an infection inside of the eye that causes inflammation in the whites of your eyes. According to the American Society of Retina Specialists, infectious endophthalmitis is an emergency and may require immediate surgery. How do eye infections form? A common cause of eye infections is wearing contaminated contact lenses. If your contact lens or the case has bacteria on it, those harmful germs will spread to your eye as soon as you touch the lens to your eye. You could also develop an infection by overwearing your contact lenses, which causes inflammation that could cause bacteria to form. You could also experience an eye infection after coming in contact with contaminated water. This could be water from a swimming pool, the shower, or washing your contact lens. Finally, you could develop a contagious eye infection like conjunctivitis by coming in contact with someone who has the infection. What are the signs of an eye infection? Watery or dry eyes Eye discharge (If you're experiencing discharge, don't miss the things that eye boogers can reveal about your health .) Redness and swelling Itching Burning Pain Sensitivity to light Blurred or decreased vision (emergency) Cloudiness over the cornea (emergency) Who is most susceptible? People with compromised immune systems are at higher risk for any kind of infection including eye infections. If you currently smoke tobacco, research indicates that you are at higher risk for developing an eye infection. If you wear contact lenses, you are more at risk of developing an infection. Contact lenses are just one of the reasons you could have bloodshot eyes . To lower your risk, never sleep in your lenses and wash them (and their case) regularly. Individuals who have experienced certain types of eye injuries could also be more at risk of developing an infection. How are they treated? Your treatment will depend on what type of eye infection you have. If you have pink eye, don't rush to treatment as it could be unnecessary. If you require a topical antibiotic, the medication will be applied directly to your eye in the form of drops or ointment. Sometimes an oral antibiotic is needed. Your doctor may also prescribe steroid eye drops to help calm down the inflammation. Regardless of what type of infection you're healing from, your doctor will most likely recommend that you take a break from your contact lenses hard lenses should be sanitized and soft ones should be replaced. You'll also want to avoid these 18 other contact lens mistakes that could ruin your eyes . Related video: Swimming in the Ocean Could Make You Vulnerable to Infection, New Study Finds (Provided by Buzz60)


Editor's note: The opinions in this article are the author's, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft. On July 22, 2009, the neuroscientist Henry Markram (pictured) walked onstage at the TEDGlobal conference in Oxford, England, and told the audience that he was going to simulate the human brain, in all its staggering complexity, in a computer. His goals were lofty: "It's perhaps to understand perception, to understand reality, and perhaps to even also understand physical reality." His timeline was ambitious: "We can do it within 10 years, and if we do succeed, we will send to TED, in 10 years, a hologram to talk to you." If the galaxy-brain meme had existed then, it would have been a great time to invoke it. It's been exactly 10 years. He did not succeed . One could argue that the nature of pioneers is to reach far and talk big, and that it's churlish to single out any one failed prediction when science is so full of them. (Science writers joke that breakthrough medicines and technologies always seem five to 10 years away, on a rolling window.) But Markram's claims are worth revisiting for two reasons. First, the stakes were huge: In 2013, the European Commission awarded his initiative the Human Brain Project (HBP) a staggering 1 billion euro grant (worth about $1.42 billion at the time). Second, the HBP's efforts, and the intense backlash to them, exposed important divides in how neuroscientists think about the brain and how it should be studied. Markram's goal wasn't to create a simplified version of the brain, but a gloriously complex facsimile, down to the constituent neurons, the electrical activity coursing along them, and even the genes turning on and off within them. From the outset, the criticism to this approach was very widespread, and to many other neuroscientists, its bottom-up strategy seemed implausible to the point of absurdity. The brain's intricacies how neurons connect and cooperate, how memories form, how decisions are made are more unknown than known , and couldn't possibly be deciphered in enough detail within a mere decade. It is hard enough to map and model the 302 neurons of the roundworm C. elegans , let alone the 86 billion neurons within our skulls. "People thought it was unrealistic and not even reasonable as a goal," says the neuroscientist Grace Lindsay , who is writing a book about modeling the brain. And what was the point? The HBP wasn't trying to address any particular research question, or test a specific hypothesis about how the brain works. The simulation seemed like an end in itself an overengineered answer to a nonexistent question, a tool in search of a use. When the HBP released a simulation of 30,000 rat neurons in 2015 a mere 0.15 percent of the rodent's tiny brain  critics billed it as a lot of work that revealed nothing new. Even if it could scale up to human-size in time, why should it? "Now you'd have a brain in a computer, and before you had a brain in a skull," Lindsay says. "What does that tell you?" Markram explained that, contra his TED Talk, he had never intended for the simulation to do much of anything. He wasn't out to make an artificial intelligence, or beat a Turing test. Instead, he pitched it as an experimental test bed a way for scientists to test their hypotheses without having to prod an animal's head. "That would be incredibly valuable," Lindsay says, but it's based on circular logic. A simulation might well allow researchers to test ideas about the brain, but those ideas would already have to be very advanced to pull off the simulation in the first place. "Once neuroscience is 'finished,' we should be able to do it, but to have it as an intermediate step along the way seems difficult." "It's not obvious to me what the very large-scale nature of the simulation would accomplish," adds Anne Churchland from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Her team, for example, simulates networks of neurons to study how brains combine visual and auditory information. "I could implement that with hundreds of thousands of neurons, and it's not clear what it would buy me if I had 70 billion." In a recent paper titled " The Scientific Case for Brain Simulations ," several HBP scientists argued that big simulations "will likely be indispensable for bridging the scales between the neuron and system levels in the brain." In other words: Scientists can look at the nuts and bolts of how neurons work, and they can study the behavior of entire organisms, but they need simulations to show how the former create the latter. The paper's authors drew a comparison to weather forecasts, in which an understanding of physics and chemistry at the scale of neighborhoods allows us to accurately predict temperature, rainfall, and wind across the whole globe. The analogy doesn't work, says Adrienne Fairhall , a neuroscientist from the University of Washington who has a background in physics. Yes, large-scale simulations are useful for understanding weather and galaxies, but "planetary systems are not about anything other than themselves," she says. "A brain is built to be about other things." That is: It takes in information about the world, and it moves human and animal bodies, which then influence that world. How much would we really learn from a disembodied brain in a virtual jar, which isn't connected to eyes, ears, or limbs? "You could take a chunk of tissue and do all the physics, but it wouldn't get at what it's all for," Fairhall says. "Biology is matter that has meaning. Simulating the tissue is doable, but meaningless." The HBP, then, is in a very odd position, criticized for being simultaneously too grandiose and too narrow. None of the skeptics I spoke with was dismissing the idea of simulating parts of the brain, but all of them felt that such efforts should be driven by actual research questions. For example, Xiao-Jing Wang from New York University has built models that show how neurons, if connected in a certain way, can hold on to electrical activity even if they're not being stimulated the essence of what we call working memory, or the ability to hold on to thoughts. Meanwhile, Chris Eliasmith from the University of Waterloo has built a model called Spaun , which uses a simplified set of 2.5 million virtual neurons to do simple arithmetic and solve basic reasoning problems. Countless such projects could have been funded with the money channeled into the HBP, which explains much of the furor around the project. In 2014, almost 800 neuroscientists wrote an open letter to the European Commission saying that "the HBP is not a well conceived or implemented project and that it is ill suited to be the centerpiece of European neuroscience." A year later, a mediation committee agreed with the critics , asking the HBP to refocus its efforts "on a smaller number of properly prioritized activities" and to retool its unorthodox governance structure . The HBP acquiesced. It effectively rebranded itself as a software project that curates existing data about the brain , provides tools for searching those data, and develops simulators that will allow others to build their own models. And with the big bolus of funding set to expire in 2023, the team's recent paper reads like a plea for more investment. "The development of high-quality brain simulators requires a long-term commitment of resources," they wrote. Maybe it's telling, though, that the people I contacted struggled to name a major contribution that the HBP has made in the past decade. That's not to say that such contributions don't exist. It's more that they don't seem to have made a splash proportional to the project's budget, or perhaps that the HBP still has to earn back the trust of a community it alienated through hype. [ Read: Power causes brain damage ] Markram seems undeterred. In a recent paper , he and his colleague Xue Fan firmly situated brain simulations within not just neuroscience as a field, but the entire arc of Western philosophy and human civilization. And in an email statement, he told me, "Political resistance (non-scientific) to the project has indeed slowed us down considerably, but it has by no means stopped us nor will it." He noted the 140 people still working on the project, a recent set of positive reviews from five external reviewers, and its "exponentially increasing" ability to "build biologically accurate models of larger and larger brain regions." No time frame, this time, but there's no shortage of other people ready to make extravagant claims about the future of neuroscience. In 2014, I attended TED's main Vancouver conference and watched the opening talk, from the MIT Media Lab founder Nicholas Negroponte. In his closing words , he claimed that in 30 years, "we are going to ingest information. You're going to swallow a pill and know English. You're going to swallow a pill and know Shakespeare. And the way to do it is through the bloodstream. So once it's in your bloodstream, it basically goes through it and gets into the brain, and when it knows that it's in the brain, in the different pieces, it deposits it in the right places." Over my left shoulder, a hushed voice whispered, "Wow." Gallery: 15 Signs of a Healthy Brain (Provided by Mom.me)