Tag Archives: cut

President Trump’s Attempts to Cut Scientific Research Funding: How Courts and Congress Stopped Him

Posted on by
Reply

The Landscape of American Scientific Research: A Year in Review

Approximately a year ago, optimism surrounded the realm of American scientific research. However, in February, the Trump administration executed significant staff reductions within federal science agencies, limiting grant access for universities and undermining funding for research overhead. Targeting prestigious universities for accusations of anti-Semitism, the administration retracted grants on matters deemed relevant to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Proposed budgets for key agencies, including NASA and the National Science Foundation (NSF), indicated sweeping financial cuts.

This turmoil led many to believe that the scientific community was under siege. Post-World War II, the federal model of outsourcing research to academic institutions seemed to be unraveling.

Holden Thorpe, editor of Science Journal, noted, “That partnership is now breaking down,” calling some of these cuts “an unexpected and immediate blow” and a “betrayal of the partnerships that have enabled American innovation and progress.”

Yet, as we reflect on the past year, those dire predictions have not materialized. Legal challenges and a recent Congressional rejection of many proposed cuts have preserved essential funding.

A coalition of scientific, educational, and civil liberties organizations, including the ACLU, APHA, and AAU, successfully contested some of the Trump administration’s pivotal policy shifts, safeguarding billions in scientific funding. As a result, funding packages negotiated in Congress over the past few weeks have largely maintained federal funding for scientific agencies similar to last year.

The House echoed the Senate’s decision on Tuesday, passing a funding package that included modest increases for National Institutes of Health (NIH) research while rejecting Trump’s proposal for a more than 40% funding cut. Trump signed the bill that evening.

Joan Padron Carney, chief government relations officer at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, stated, “Congress has effectively rejected the president’s very deep cuts.” Given recent trends, she added, “While flat funding may not have seemed like a victory before, considering the circumstances of the past year, we are quite satisfied.”

It’s crucial to acknowledge that the scientific sector hasn’t completely evaded the adverse impacts of the administration. Both the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and NASA have experienced substantial job losses, NIH leadership underwent significant changes, and there have been reductions in essential climate reports and weather services.

The National Weather Service releases weather balloons on a routine basis above Gaylord, Michigan.
Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post via Getty Images

Padron-Carney acknowledged that the Trump administration would likely persist in its initiatives to defund science on topics it disapproves of. She noted that a presidential order mandates many grants to obtain approval from senior political appointees.

Despite these challenges, Padron-Carney remarked, “Science is holding up as best it can,” particularly after a year that felt precarious.

The White House did not respond to inquiries regarding Congressional decisions on science funding, although it commended the bill prior to its passage.

“The Administration appreciates that Congress is proceeding with the spending process in a manner that avoids an extensive omnibus package while adhering to a fiscally responsible agreement that prioritizes essential investments,” stated the White House Office of Management and Budget.

A significant concern within the scientific community revolves around disrupting grant flows to universities and research institutes, especially from the NIH, the primary agency responsible for biomedical and life sciences research funding.

The Trump administration’s attempts to assert control over government agencies led to substantial delays, cancellations, and a halt in thousands of grants. Additionally, the administration’s move to limit indirect costs universities could charge to NIH created uproar, with a proposed 15% cap estimated to save the government $4 billion annually. Universities and states contested this cap, claiming it violated Congressional guidelines and NIH policies.

Substantial legal victories eventually facilitated the reinstated flow of funds.

Last month, an appeals court upheld a ruling that the Trump administration couldn’t impose caps on indirect research spending. Furthermore, in December, the ACLU reached a partial settlement when it filed a lawsuit challenging the NIH’s alleged “ideological purge” on research grants. This settlement mandated the NIH to resume reviewing specific stalled grants, while other aspects related to the diversity, equity, and inclusion lawsuit are still pending.

Olga Axelrod, ACLU attorney involved in subsidy litigation, described the lawsuit as an essential check, affirming, “However, public health research remains under threat.”

The NIH opted not to comment on the lawsuit proceedings.

Headquarters of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, captured in May.
Wesley Lapointe/Washington Post, from Getty Images File

A surge in lawsuits contesting the Trump administration’s restrictions on grant funding continues, with appeals pending. The Georgetown University’s Health Policy and Law Initiative has tracked 39 related funding complaints this past year, a significant increase from zero last year.

Katie Keith, the initiative’s director, expressed that “It’s exploded,” noting mixed results thus far.

In one instance, a judge ruled against the Trump administration after it cut Harvard University’s funding by $2.2 million. Conversely, another case saw a judge dismiss a lawsuit where faculty aimed to restore nearly $400 million in grants to Columbia University. Notably, Columbia had to pay the government a $200 million settlement after allegations of anti-discrimination violations.

Harvard University’s campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in June.
Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images

By the end of the fiscal year 2025, NIH expenditures reached typical levels. This marked a substantial shift from earlier in the year, when it seemed improbable NIH would fully utilize the $36 billion allocated by Congress for external grants.

“NIH was significantly lagging,” remarked Jeremy Berg, a professor of computational and systems biology at the University of Pittsburgh who monitors NIH spending.

However, after Congress urged NIH to expedite spending, the funds began to flow, mitigating risks to vital research.

Preserved brain samples at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle, where research focuses on Alzheimer’s and other neurodegenerative diseases.
Evan Bush/NBC News

To adapt, the NIH has adjusted its usual practice of funding projects annually, now distributing funds across the entire grant period (typically 4-5 years).

“This essentially serves as an accounting measure,” stated Berg, adding that the number of new projects funded in 2025 had dwindled by about 5% to 10%.

Nonetheless, financial resources continued to flow into research institutions nationwide.

The scientific community has increasingly turned to Congress as an ally amid funding disputes.

In its budget proposal last spring, the Trump administration expressed strong opposition to scientific funding, suggesting significant cuts to various agencies. Proposals indicated the NSF would face a reduction of nearly 57%, NASA around 24%, and the NIH exceeding 40%. Overall, the proposal outlined almost a 36% cut in non-defense scientific research and development funding, as noted by AAAS.

Nevertheless, Congress largely opposed President Trump’s recommendations, maintaining scientific funding within negotiated spending bills. The NIH’s budget was established at $48.7 billion, reflecting a $415 million increase over 2025. According to Senate Vice Chairman Patty Murray, approximately 75% of this allocation supports external research grants. Moreover, NASA’s budget faced only a 1.6% reduction, and NSF experienced a 3.4% cut.

A meteorologist observes weather patterns at the NOAA Weather and Climate Prediction Center in Maryland, captured in 2024.
Michael A. McCoy/Bloomberg/Getty Images File

Congress also enhanced NIH funding for cancer research by $128 million, Alzheimer’s research by $100 million, and added $15 million to ALS research initiatives.

Additionally, legislative measures were introduced to prevent future attempts to limit indirect research spending.

The law mandates NIH to provide monthly reports to Congress on grant awards, terminations, and cancellations, allowing for better tracking of expenditures.

“This illustrates continued bipartisan support for the federal government’s crucial role in bolstering research,” noted Toby Smith, senior vice president for government relations and public policy at the Association of American Universities.

Nonetheless, questions linger about the NIH’s functionality with a reduced workforce and the extent of political influence from the Trump administration. Approximately half of the directorships at the NIH’s 27 institutes and centers remain unfilled.

“We’ve secured Congress’s support for funding. However, can they effectively execute it? Will adequate staffing be available?” queried Smith.

Even if major funding disruptions are averted this year, the uncertainties stemming from the first year of the second Trump administration could resonate throughout the scientific community for years to come.

A recent report in Science Magazine revealed that over 10,000 professionals holding Ph.D.s have departed from the federal government. Moreover, a study published in JAMA Internal Medicine indicated that funding interruptions affected clinical trials involving 74,000 participants. Additionally, the influx of young scientists training at U.S. universities is dwindling.

A sign from the March 7 Stand Up for Science march in Seattle Center, urging for continued support of scientific funding.
Stephanie Ryder

At the University of Washington, a leading public institution for biomedical research that heavily relies on NIH funding, there have been hiring freezes, travel restrictions, and furloughs implemented. The influx of new doctoral students entering the medical school has decreased by one-third, primarily due to uncertainty regarding continued funding for principal investigators.

Shelly Sakiyama Elbert, associate dean for research and graduate education at the University of California School of Medicine, expressed, “Some nights, I find it hard to sleep, pondering how to secure funding for my lab.”

The only constant in 2025, she emphasized, has been the feeling of “whiplash.”

Elbert also highlighted a decline in faculty positions and a 5% drop in doctoral student applications at universities.

“This uncertainty only hampers scientific progress,” she concluded.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

New AI Tool Could Cut Wasted Efforts in Organ Transplants by 60%

Posted on by
Reply

Medical professionals have created an AI tool capable of decreasing wasted efforts in organ transplants by 60%.

Across the globe, thousands of patients await potentially life-saving organ donations, with more individuals on the waiting list than available organs.

Recently, the scope of liver transplants has broadened to include donors who have passed away from cardiac arrest. However, in around half of the cases involving donations after cardiovascular death (DCD), the transplant is ultimately called off.

This occurs because the duration from the removal of life support to the moment of death must not exceed 45 minutes. Surgeons frequently decline to proceed with a liver transplant if the donor does not pass away within the timeframe necessary to maintain organ viability, which increases complications for recipients.

Now, a team of doctors, scientists, and researchers at Stanford University has developed a machine learning model that forecasts whether a donor is likely to pass away before the organ can be transplanted.

This AI tool has surpassed leading surgeons, cutting down the rate of wasted procurements—where preparation for a transplant begins but the donor dies too late—by 60%.

“By pinpointing when an organ is likely to be viable before initiating surgical preparations, this model could enhance the efficiency of the transplant process,” stated Dr. Kazunari Sasaki, a clinical professor of abdominal transplantation and the study’s senior author.

“It also has the capability to make organ transplants accessible to a greater number of candidates in need.”

Here are the specifics of this breakthrough: Published in Lancet Digital Health journal.

This advancement could lessen the instances in which organs are prepared for recovery by healthcare workers but are deemed unsuitable for transplantation, imposing financial and operational challenges on transplant centers.

Hospitals primarily estimate this critical period based on the judgment of the surgeons, which varies significantly and can result in unnecessary expenses and wasted resources.

The new AI tool was trained with data from over 2,000 donors from various U.S. transplant centers. It utilizes neurological, respiratory, and cardiovascular data to predict the likelihood of death in potential donors with greater accuracy than previous models or human specialists.

Skip past newsletter promotions

The model was tested both retrospectively and prospectively, successfully reducing procurement waste by 60% compared to surgeon assessments. Notably, the researchers indicated that accuracy was upheld even with some missing donor information.

Reliable, data-driven tools assist medical professionals in making informed decisions, optimizing organ usage, and minimizing wasted efforts and costs.

This method could represent a significant advancement in transplantation, the researchers emphasized, showcasing the “potential for advanced AI techniques to maximize organ utilization from DCD donors.”

In the next phase, they plan to refine the AI tool and test it for heart and lung transplants.

Source: www.theguardian.com

A Simple Method to Dramatically Cut Your AI’s Energy Consumption

Posted on by
Reply

AI relies on data centers that consume a significant amount of energy

Jason Alden/Bloomberg/Getty

Optimizing the choice of AI models for various tasks could lead to an energy saving of 31.9 terawatt-hours this year alone, equivalent to the output of five nuclear reactors.

Thiago da Silva Barros from France’s Cote d’Azur University examined 14 distinct tasks where generative AI tools are utilized, including text generation, speech recognition, and image classification.

We investigated public leaderboards, such as those provided by the machine learning platform Hugging Face, to analyze the performance of various models. The energy efficiency during inference—when an AI model generates a response—was assessed using a tool named CarbonTracker, and total energy consumption was estimated by tracking user downloads.

“We estimated the energy consumption based on the model size, which allows us to make better predictions,” states da Silva Barros.

The findings indicate that by switching from the highest performing model to the most energy-efficient option for each of the 14 tasks, energy usage could be decreased by 65.8%, with only a 3.9% reduction in output quality. The researchers believe this tradeoff may be acceptable to most users.

Some individuals are already utilizing the most energy-efficient models, suggesting that if users transitioned from high-performance models to the more economical alternatives, overall energy consumption could drop by approximately 27.8%. “We were taken aback by the extent of savings we uncovered,” remarks team member Frédéric Giroir from the French National Center for Scientific Research.

However, da Silva Barros emphasizes that changes are necessary from both users and AI companies. “It’s essential to consider implementing smaller models, even if some performance is sacrificed,” he asserts. “As companies develop new models, it is crucial that they provide information regarding their energy consumption patterns to help users assess their impact.”

Some AI firms are mitigating energy usage through a method known as model distillation, where a more extensive model trains a smaller, more efficient one. This approach is already showing significant benefits. Chris Priest from the University of Bristol, UK notes that Google recently claimed an advance in energy efficiency: 33 times more efficient measures with their Gemini model within the past year.

However, allowing users the option to select the most efficient models “is unlikely to significantly curb the energy consumption of data centers, as the authors suggest, particularly within the current AI landscape,” contends Priest. “By reducing energy per request, we can support a larger customer base more rapidly with enhanced inference capabilities,” he adds.

“Utilizing smaller models will undoubtedly decrease energy consumption in the short term, but various additional factors need consideration for any significant long-term predictions,” cautions Sasha Luccioni from Hugging Face. She highlights the importance of considering rebound effects, such as increased usage, alongside broader social and economic ramifications.

Luccioni points out that due to limited transparency from individual companies, research in this field often relies on external estimates and analyses. “What we need for more in-depth evaluations is greater transparency from AI firms, data center operators, and even governmental bodies,” she insists. “This will enable researchers and policymakers to make well-informed predictions and decisions.”

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Trump’s 2026 Budget Suggests $6 Billion Cut to NASA Funding

Posted on by
Reply

Under President Trump’s proposed budget, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration aims to become the nation’s focal point for lunar and Martian exploration, sending astronauts to these celestial bodies.

The Trump administration has suggested an $18.8 billion budget for NASA, a reduction of 24% from the current fiscal year’s funding of $24.8 billion. This plan is part of Trump’s commitment to “plant the flag” on Mars, a promise made during his Congress address last March.

This budget shift aligns with the vision of Elon Musk, who founded SpaceX two decades ago with aspirations to transport settlers to Mars someday.

However, the proposal does not outline how the $1 billion allocation will be utilized or the timeline for sending astronauts to Mars. Musk has indicated that SpaceX intends to launch a new, large spacecraft toward Mars by the latter half of 2026, though it’s still under development.

Janet Petro, NASA administrator, stated, “The proposal includes investments focused on crucial scientific and technological research while advancing exploration of the Moon and Mars.”

The budget cuts will mainly affect NASA’s Robotics and Space Science Mission, including the proposed cancellation of a mission to retrieve Martian rock samples and a climate observation satellite. The Orion crew capsules are set to return astronauts to the Moon post-Artemis III, the first mission to land near the Moon’s South Pole. Additionally, the Gateway, a planned orbital space station around the Moon, will be scrapped.

Casey Drier, director of space policy at the Planetary Association, noted, “The exploration of space is a nonprofit advocating for space exploration. This budget reflects America’s standing as a leader in space, yet we are becoming more introspective.”

The budget plan also suggests an increase in operations at the International Space Station, while proposing the elimination of NASA’s educational initiatives, labeling them as “awakening.” Previous attempts by both President Trump and President Obama to terminate NASA’s educational funding were countered by Congress reinstating the funds.

In aviation, the proposed budget cuts research aimed at minimizing greenhouse gas emissions from aircraft.

The budget further suggests reducing “mission support” by over $1 billion, aiming to save costs through employee workforce cuts, maintenance reduction, construction decreases, and “environmental compliance activities.”

A report from the National Academy last September highlighted that NASA has requested a notable increase in funding for infrastructure improvements.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Kennedy meets with tribal leader amidst HHS cut tensions

Posted on by
Reply

When Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was about to take the stage, the governor of the Gila River Indian community was still addressing the audience, expressing concerns about recent Trump administration actions.

Governor Stephen Law Lewis emphasized the importance of tribes having a political stance and urged for a more thoughtful approach to government efficiency cuts, rather than a drastic one.

Kennedy was on his Healthy Tour of America in the Southwest states, with his latest stop at the Gila River Wild Horse Pass Resort and Casino in Arizona to participate in The Tribal Self Governance Conference.

The 1975 law allowed native communities to develop programs based on their cultural needs, marking a shift from federal administration. Kennedy’s dedication to improving tribal health stems from his family history and personal experiences.

However, recent decisions within Kennedy’s agency have raised concerns among tribal leaders regarding the support for Indigenous communities in the face of health challenges.

Kennedy assured tribal leaders that certain health services for Native Americans would be exempt from recent executive orders. He engaged in discussions on strategies to address health issues within tribal communities.

Kennedy emphasized the need to address the root causes of health crises in tribal communities, particularly focusing on the food system. He also shared plans to implement “robot nurses” in Indigenous groups, which was met with mixed reactions from the crowd.

His extensive work advocating for Indigenous communities dates back to the 1990s, highlighting a commitment to supporting native groups in various negotiations and initiatives.

Kennedy pledged to address the unique challenges faced by Indigenous leaders in accessing high-quality healthcare. The discussion also touched on the need to build confidence in vaccines among Native American communities.

Kennedy’s tour included visits to healthcare facilities serving Native Americans, as well as outreach to tribal groups to address their unique health concerns.

He defended his agency’s response to a measles outbreak during a press conference, highlighting the importance of effective public health initiatives.

Source: www.nytimes.com

Johns Hopkins Brings More Than 2,000 Staff Members Following USAID Cut by Trump

Posted on by
Reply

Johns Hopkins University has announced that President Donald Trump’s administration will be cutting over 2,000 jobs due to the withdrawal of federal funding for numerous international aid projects. These projects include programs focused on preventing the spread of HIV in India and conducting clinical trials for diarrhea disease in Bangladesh.

The university, known for its significant scientific research contributions, stated that 1,975 jobs in the United States and 247 jobs internationally will be eliminated as a result of the cuts to the US’s international development institutes. Additionally, 78 employees in the US and 29 internationally based employees will be affected.

The institution expressed that this decision will have a major impact on important work being done both in Baltimore and abroad, totaling over $800 million in USAID funds being discontinued.

Researchers leading the affected programs warned that these cuts could lead to an increase in dangerous outbreaks. Furthermore, this change will also impact the economy of Baltimore since Johns Hopkins is the largest private employer in Maryland.

About Half of Johns Hopkins' Last year's funding came from federal research dollarsaccording to a letter from university president Ron Daniels.

Similar employment freezes are being implemented at other universities across the country in response to budget cuts from the Trump administration. Notable institutions like Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, and Notre Dame have halted faculty hiring.

Additionally, recent actions by the Trump administration include canceling a $400 million grant to Columbia University and revoking $30 million in funding from the University of Maine.

As a result, more than 50 universities are facing scrutiny as the administration aims to terminate diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.

Despite criticism, the White House has defended the decision to streamline federal agencies, stating that it will free up more resources for scientific research.

Researchers at Johns Hopkins are concerned about the impact of the cuts to USAID programs on the communities they serve, especially regarding HIV prevention efforts in India. Dr. Sunil Solomon, involved in the HIV detection and prevention research program ‘Accelerate,’ highlighted the potential negative consequences of program closures.

Dr. Judd Walson, chair of Johns Hopkins’s Department of International Health, expressed concern over the closure of programs such as a Tuberculosis Research Program and clinical trials in Bangladesh focused on reducing cholera and other diarrheal diseases.

The decision to end these programs has raised alarms about the potential effects on public health security worldwide, according to Walson.

In Baltimore, the economic implications of these cuts are also significant, with Johns Hopkins contributing billions to the Maryland economy and supporting tens of thousands of jobs in the state.

Further threats to Johns Hopkins loom as the Trump administration attempts to limit National Institutes of Health payments to universities for research grants. Legal challenges are ongoing, with the university potentially facing significant financial impact.

Johns Hopkins received over $1 billion in grant funding from the NIH in 2024, and the proposed cuts to indirect fee payments could have substantial financial consequences for the institution.

Source: www.nbcnews.com

UK retailers embrace automation with robotic packaging machines and AI cameras to cut labor expenses

Posted on by
Reply

EElectronic shelf labels, return machines, robotic bagging machines and even self-service tills are just some of the many technologies UK retailers are adopting to solve the problem of rising labor costs.

Big retailers have been releasing a flurry of festive deals in recent weeks as they face rising labor costs from April following increases in the national minimum wage and employers' National Insurance Contributions (NICs). , investment in automation has always been active.

The investment could boost productivity in an industry that has long relied on cheap labor – a key goal of the government. But they will also replace entry-level jobs and reduce the number of roles in the sector, which is Britain's biggest employer.

When the British Retail Consortium asked finance chiefs at major retailers how they would respond to the impending increase in employer NICs, almost a third said they would make greater use of automation, but this Hours of what's behind the hike, head office job cuts, and reductions in working hours.

So what innovations are they considering and whose jobs might they impact?

electronic shelf price labels

Electronic shelf labels are already common in some other countries, and could be on UK high streets in the blink of an eye by 2025. One retailer's manager told the Guardian that NIC's rising labor costs suddenly made the switch economically viable.

Change prices with the push of a button, saving staff time removing and replacing hundreds of small paper labels. Electronics chain Currys plans to introduce electronic pricing to 100 of its 300 UK stores by the end of this year after trials in stores in Northern Europe, with supermarket groups Sainsbury's and Co-op also experimenting.

self service

Shopper-operated checkouts are widespread in supermarkets, and we expect to see more of them in fashion and home goods retailers this year.

Primark is rolling out the service in 41 stores in the UK and plans to expand to at least five more this spring, while Next is piloting it in one branch.

Inditex, owner of Japanese fashion chains Uniqlo and Zara, has led the way with technology that allows customers to recall entire baskets of goods without having to scan them with wireless tags. Marks & Spencer is experimenting with this approach for customers purchasing non-food items.

Grocery stores are also continuing to innovate. Co-ops are testing hybrid checkouts that can be operated by self-service or staff, and some supermarkets have added larger self-checkouts suitable for handling full carts.

Self-scanning systems, such as Sainsbury's SmartShop and Tesco's Scan as you Shop, where shoppers use a handheld device or smartphone app to recall prices, are also on the rise. Sainsbury's said 30% of the groceries it sold during the peak holiday season were processed through SmartShop, leading to “lower costs and faster checkouts”.

Automated return machines have also been introduced, allowing shoppers to drop off unwanted items by simply swiping a QR code. John Lewis is testing the product at three Waitrose stores.

But the idea of ​​leaving stores completely unmanned has been questioned. Amazon's “Just Walk Out” store, where shoppers sign in through an app and technology automatically monitors and charges their purchases, hasn't been a huge success. The company has 21 stores in the UK, with one store opening in north London in November after several closures in 2023 and 2024. Tesco only has four GetGo self-service stores, the first of which opened in 2021, while Aldi only has one such store in the UK.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Warehouse automation and robots

Retailers have been gradually increasing automation in their warehouses for years, but rising labor costs are accelerating that trend.

Sales of assembly line robots to food and drink, logistics and consumer goods companies rose 31% in the first nine months of last year, according to industry body Automate UK. This number does not include autonomous mobile robots, which move and complete tasks without a human operator and are becoming increasingly popular.

For example, Amazon and John Lewis use autonomous robots to move goods around their warehouses and bring them to the humans who pack them. Ocado's entire business model is based on the use of warehouses run by robots, but the company has expanded its use to go beyond just picking products out of crates and putting them into shoppers' bags and into vans. It's starting to expand.

One Irish retailer recently introduced a robot that patrols its stores to monitor out-of-stock items and mispricing, according to the Institute of Grocery Distributors (IGD), and a U.S. retailer is also rolling out the same technology. It is said that they have been able to increase their inventory level to 98.5%.

artificial intelligence

IGD also cited AI-powered cameras, which check shelf gaps in real time and monitor how shoppers interact with products, as one of the key technologies to improve store operations this year. There is. Last year, Morrisons added cameras to supermarket shelves that allow customers to reorder stock if needed.

Retailers also want to reduce waste and improve marketing efforts by using AI to analyze vast amounts of data and handle simple, repetitive tasks.

Sainsbury's has introduced an AI-enabled predictive tool to ensure it has the right amount of products on its shelves as part of a £1bn cost-cutting plan. Waitrose uses this technology to schedule the right workers for deliveries from stores and analyze food trends for product development. Meanwhile, M&S uses the technology to create product descriptions online and advise shoppers on clothing choices based on their body type and style preferences.

Tesco uses AI to make purchasing decisions and optimize routes for delivery drivers. The supermarket's CEO Ken Murphy said customer interactions will be “truly enhanced and driven by AI in almost every aspect of our business.”

He uses this to analyze shoppers' loyalty card data and learn how to save money and take care of their health by not buying too much (or perhaps too much) of certain products. suggested it could provide “relevant inspiration and ideas for shoppers and their families.” .

Source: www.theguardian.com

Despite strong performance of Dungeons & Dragons, Hasbro to cut 1,100 jobs

Posted on by
Reply

According to one source, Hasbro plans to lay off 1,100 employees. SEC filing. Hasbro, the company behind series such as “Dungeons & Dragons” and “Transformers,” has already laid off employees. 800 employees In January. Some employees will learn the fate of their jobs on Tuesday, while others will be made redundant over the next year. Hasbro told shareholders it wants to cut costs by about $350 million to $400 million by 2025.

Hasbro CEO Chris Cox wrote: Memo to employee — shared in an SEC filing — says he will focus the company’s attention on licensing opportunities, entertainment expansion and “freebies.”[ing] Fund your own content to drive new brand development. He blamed the company’s losses on vague “market headwinds.”

Hasbro’s overall revenue was down 10% year over year. However, Hasbro owns Wizards of the Coast (WoTC), the company that produces Dungeons & Dragons (D&D) and Magic the Gathering. 1 billion dollars Every year. The division of the company that operates WoTC and digital games has seen an increase in revenue 40% compared to previous year Operating income was $423.6 million, and operating income was $203.4 million. Despite this significant growth, Hasbro has struggled overall. So Cox seems to be refocusing Hasbro’s efforts on what’s actually benefiting the company.

D&D has become increasingly popular over the past few years. This is largely thanks to the creators of third-party content such as Critical Role and Dimension 20, in which the ensemble cast plays her D&D for the entertainment of viewers. The series also made headlines this year with Baldur’s Gate III, a hugely successful Hollywood movie and video game licensed from the Dungeons & Dragons IP.Just last week, Baldur’s Gate won game of the year At the Game Awards.

Hasbro is at a strange crossroads. Even though the toy business is in decline, he suddenly has an unexpected cash cow in Wizards of the Coast, which he acquired 24 years ago.

“The D&D strategy is a broad four-quadrant strategy, and we have this strong brand with similar recognition, such as ‘The Lord of the Rings’ and ‘Harry Potter,'” Cox said. He said it on a program. Call to investors Last December, we received some insight into the company’s plans. But what makes Dungeons & Dragons (a game system where groups of players develop their own plots and characters) something like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings, where all fans know the same characters and stories? Hasbro’s attempts to change are becoming increasingly painful.The movie “Dungeons & Dragons: Honor of Thieves” received positive reviews when it was released in March, but ultimately poor performance At the ticket office.

“To position Hasbro for growth, we must first ensure our fundamentals are strong and profitable,” Cox wrote in a company memo. “To do that, we need to modernize and become even leaner.”

Source: techcrunch.com