The Final Shape is finally here in Destiny 2, and the new Pale Heart destination is packed with secrets and Lost Sectors for Guardians to discover as they prepare for the final confrontation with the Witness. One new Lost Sector in particular, though, has some issues. Located within the Pale Heart destination, the Blooming Deep Lost Sector isn’t giving rewards or loot to players who complete it. This issue isn’t affecting every Destiny 2 player, but a large percentage of Guardians are leaving this Lost Sector empty-handed due to a bug. If you’re suffering from lost loot in this Lost Sector, here’s what you can do to claim your rewards from the Blooming Deep in Destiny 2. How to Get Blooming Deep Lost Sector Loot in Destiny 2 The Blooming Deep Lost Sector is currently suffering from a bug in Destiny 2 The Final Shape where players will not receive any loot upon completion if they do not open the final chest before the cutscene plays. If you want to get t...

BG3 fans rejoice, we’re finally getting official mod support with Patch 7! Larian Studios announced in a community update that official mod support is coming to Baldur’s Gate 3, but before that, it’s getting a closed alpha and beta. Here’s how you can sign up to participate. How to sign up for Baldur’s Gate 3 official mod support closed alpha and beta Arriving this September is Patch 7 of Baldur’s Gate 3 which’ll bring alongside official mod support for both PC and console. But before this arrives, Larian Studios is holding a closed alpha and beta for players to test out the official mod program. Currently, you won’t be able to sign up for the closed alpha that began on June 3, but you will get the chance to register for the closed beta in July. The two testing phases of the BG3 official mod support program started with the closed alpha June 3 as Larian Studios has invited mod authors to partake. Over this period it will invite m...

The Final Shape expansion has finally arrived in Destiny 2, and while Bungie has ensured a mostly smooth launch thanks to a short delay that gave life to the excellent Into the Light update, there are still some minor issues with this DLC that players should expect to encounter during their initial playthroughs. While there’s nothing seriously wrong with The Final Shape, Bungie has released a list of known issues affecting the expansion ahead of launch so players know what to expect and how to avoid any potential mishaps. Most of them involve incorrect perk descriptions or certain abilities not working properly, but others can prevent your campaign progress from tracking or worse. All Final Shape Known Issues in Destiny 2 Here are all of the known issues that Bungie is working on fixing in Destiny 2 The Final Shape. Players progressing through The Final Shape campaign in a fireteam should avoid joining missions in-progress or swapping characters during the ...

Biden: Israel May Have Committed War Crimes, and Netanyahu Wants War to Keep Power

Onanism at the Washington Post

Eating too much meat is bad for you, bad for the environment, and fatal for the animals involved. Those are straight facts, indisputable and proven through years of study. But counterpoint: have you considered that vegans are annoying?If the comments section under just about any media promoting a vegetarian or vegan diet is anything to go by, the answer to that question is probably “yes”. And, in any case, what about all the poor plants, huh? You okay with murdering them, IFLScience? The blood of countless… uh, cabbages on your hands?All things considered, people are really, really good at coming up with excuses for eating more meat than ever. And the weirdest thing? According to a new study, which followed six focus groups with Danish consumers about their attitudes towards their diets and the environment, we kind of know it’s all bullshit – and we tie ourselves in a variety of predictable mental knots to justify it anyway.“All of the participants – predominantly meat eaters – agree that one of the best things a person can do to be a more climate-minded eater is to eat less meat,” said Thomas Skelly, a Ph.D. fellow at the Department of Food and Resource Economics at the University of Copenhagen, and first author of the study, in a statement on the findings. “But when addressing their own meat consumption, other mechanisms kick in,” he added. Oh yeah. Prepare to feel seen.Playing dumbImagine you knew a way to cut your carbon footprint by more than half; it was easy, required no real major sacrifice on your part, and would even make you healthier and maybe improve your love life. Imagine you then decided not to do it. That would be, well, kind of stupid, wouldn’t it?"There is certainly enough ambiguity in public discourse and the media for people to make these justifications without sounding completely ignorant in social settings."Thomas SkellyAnd yet, according to the research, that’s precisely what many of us are doing. “When all of the focus groups point to reduced meat consumption as one of the most climate effective things people can do, it demonstrates the existence of a collective knowledge,” Skelly pointed out.“But on the other hand, this knowledge can be problematized,” he continued, “and the results demonstrate that it is socially acceptable to problematize it.”What does that mean? Well, you’ve no doubt seen this tactic in the wild: it’s what’s happening whenever someone tells a vegan about the environmental cost of avocados or meat substitutes like soy, or points to the supposed necessity of meat in a human diet. “With this notion, the participants confirm to each other that their food practices are not more problematic than food practices among people who have cut out meat entirely,” Skelly explained. It’s not actually justified: “The truth is that red meat has a far greater climate footprint than both avocados and vegan products,” Skelly pointed out, “and vegans do not necessarily eat more avocados or processed products than meat eaters” – but that doesn’t really matter, according to the paper. It’s just truthful enough, with the details just obscure enough, that for someone already looking for excuses for their meat consumption, it can be elevated to a fact on equal footing with years of scientific research behind it.“We are unable to conclude whether this is because people actually don't know [the truth], or because not knowing is convenient,” Skelly said. “But there is certainly enough ambiguity in public discourse and the media for people to make these justifications without sounding completely ignorant in social settings.”Look over there!So, what about when these things are pointed out to the meat fans? Well, when in doubt, there was one tactic that seemed to pop up time and time again. Whether consciously or not, the participants chose to simply divert the conversation, and talk about something else.Cutting out meat entirely was seen as an absurd position – and one only taken by haughty stick-in-the-muds.“They [would] come up with various excuses and justifications or try to shift the focus onto something else,” explained Kia Ditlevsen, an associate professor in the Department of Food and Resource Economics and one of the co-authors of the study. “People quickly derail the topic,” she said, “and begin talking about other things, such as how they seek to avoid food waste and plastic packaging.”You might think this would be an obvious ploy – after all, packaging, retail, and even transport of food typically has a much lower carbon footprint than the food itself. But within the group studied, it was seen as totally legitimate: “Within the group, people are mutually supportive of such derailments,” Ditlevsen said. “Our interpretation is that this is because these things are more culturally neutral and harmless to relate to. No one really has much of an identity attached to plastic disposal.” But you know what definitely isn’t seen as neutral? Going vegan. Cutting out meat entirely was seen as an absurd position – and one only taken by haughty stick-in-the-muds, Ditlevsen explained. “There was a tendency for them to […] scold vegans for being extremists,” she noted.In other words: despite being a perfectly reasonable way to reduce your personal climate impact – one which the focus group participants clearly knew and understood the effectiveness of – adopting a vegan diet was just kind of written off as impossible. “For example, when a participant states that he or she doesn't intend on going vegan, the other participants laugh,” Skelly said. “In doing so, they confirm to one another that veganism would be a ridiculous solution.”The importance of messagingSo, what’s the solution? How do we reconcile a clear desire to reduce our environmental impact with this dilly-dallying on one of the most effective methods to do so? Well, part of the answer might lie in combatting the mixed or counterproductive messaging coming from politicians and corporations. That may not be easy: in the US, meat and dairy companies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars lobbying to block climate legislation over the past couple of decades, with evermore aggressive marketing campaigns targeting new consumer blocs.If there is to be more clarity and less confusion among consumers, […] it becomes more difficult to come up with socially acceptable excuses and justifications.Kia DitlevsenOver in Europe, the situation is more clear-cut – but not by a whole lot. “We have politicians who say, for example, that Danes should keep on eating spaghetti and meat sauce, [and] it helps support the notion that we can simply carry on with our meat consumption,” Ditlevsen pointed out. “At the same time, the Danish Official Dietary Guidelines say that we should eat significantly less meat […] This is also something that the European Union emphasizes.”This causes a discrepancy between the messages that people receive, she explained – and that confusion is where these justifications for excessive meat consumption sneak in and take hold. In response, “clear statements from politicians and authorities must be made,” recommended Ditlevsen, “messaging that unequivocally supports the importance of cutting back on meat consumption.” Would it be enough? Probably not, she said – but it would at least be a start.“If there is to be more clarity and less confusion among consumers, […] it becomes more difficult to come up with socially acceptable excuses and justifications,” Ditlevsen said. “This alone probably won't do, but it could help get people moving in the right direction.”The study is published in the Journal of Consumer Culture.

A leading architecture and engineering firm behind the world's tallest building – among other major projects – has teamed up with startup Energy Vault in order to design skyscrapers that incorporate gravity batteries into their design.As the planet moves towards renewable energy, we are faced with the problem of storage. The problem is that the wind doesn't blow and the Sun doesn't shine at precisely the time when people want to consume their power. On particularly windy or sunny days, too much electricity can be generated, potentially leading to a situation where consumers are paid to consume electricity rather than overload the grid. Cheap, clean energy is, of course, a good thing, but power that isn't used becomes lost.It would be better if we could store that energy away for later use. Gravity batteries are one way of doing that.Despite the cool name, the idea behind gravity batteries is really simple. During times when energy sources are producing more energy than the demand, the excess energy is used to move weights (in the form of water, or sometimes sand) upwards, turning it into potential energy. When the power supply is low, these objects can then be released, powering turbines as our good friend (and deadly enemy) gravity sends them toward the Earth. Though generally gravity batteries take the form of reservoirs, abandoned mines moving sand or other weights up when excess power is being produced are also being created. The latest idea is to incorporate gravity batteries into the design of tall buildings.“Since our founding, [architecture and engineering firm Skidmore, Owings & Merrill] has pushed the boundaries of architecture and engineering, redefining what buildings can do for cities and communities,” Adam Semel, Managing Partner of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, said in a statement. “This partnership with Energy Vault is a commitment not only to accelerate the world’s transition away from fossil fuels, but also to explore, together, how the architecture of renewable energy can enhance our shared natural landscapes and urban environments."Incorporating gravity batteries into the design of future skyscrapers will give them multi-GWh of gravity-based energy storage, enough to power them and adjacent buildings, according to the teams. By incorporating the hydro system into buildings, they hope to minimize disruption to wildlife ecosystems associated with other energy storage systems.

After one of its cookie dough products was taken off shelves last year following the discovery it contained peanuts that weren’t supposed to be there, a cookie manufacturer has been issued a warning by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), after an inspection uncovered “serious violations”.Back in October 2023, a Cookies-N-Milk product was issued a Class I recall – the most serious kind – by the FDA. While the product’s packaging indicated that it contained chocolate chip cookie dough, it was found to actually contain peanut butter cookie dough. This mix-up meant that the presence of peanuts wasn’t declared on the label, presenting a serious risk to those with a peanut allergy. Though an allergic reaction to peanuts can be mild for many people – though still fairly unpleasant, with common symptoms including sickness, breathlessness, and hives – they can trigger a more severe reaction called anaphylaxis, which is life-threatening.The severity of the recall triggered an FDA inspection of Cookies-n-Milk’s manufacturing facility in Texas, which revealed more concerns.“Your facility manufactures, packages, and distributes RTE [ready-to-eat] Edible Cookie Dough products with and without peanuts, in addition to other allergens (soy, milk, wheat). Therefore, allergens are a known or reasonably foreseeable hazard,” the FDA wrote in its letter to Cookies-n-Milk.It’s good practice to state that a product is manufactured in a facility that handles such ingredients, even if those ingredients aren’t in the actual product. That being said, they also failed to declare ingredients that actually were in one of their products, including milk powder and baking soda. “A knowledgeable person manufacturing/processing food in your circumstances would identify allergens as a hazard requiring a preventive control at the packaging/labeling step.” Ooft.The FDA inspection also found that the company didn’t have any processes in place to identify and evaluate the risk of mycotoxins. These are toxic compounds produced by molds, and one of them, aflaxtoxin, has been associated with peanuts.Though Cookies-n-Milk provided a written response to the FDA’s findings in November, outlining how it would correct the issues with labeling and evaluating mycotoxins, the FDA stated that this didn’t have enough supporting evidence, nor did it include updated hazard analysis or food safety procedures.As a result, the FDA issued the company with a warning letter.“It is your responsibility to ensure that your firm complies with all requirements of federal law, including FDA regulations,” the letter reads. “This letter notifies you of our concerns and provides you an opportunity to address them. Failure to adequately address this matter may result in legal action including, without limitation, seizure and injunction.”That’s a very polite way of saying, “Get your shit together.”

Some people’s specific genetic traits could leave them more vulnerable to heart attack during times of stress, like national holidays or elections. Recent research is showing how an inherited vulnerability could be behind a trend that’s long been observed but has remained poorly understood.“We found people who are genetically predisposed to stress tend to have a strikingly higher probability of developing a heart attack after these stressful events,” explained lead author Dr Shady Abohashem in a statement. Many doctors have noticed a spike in heart attacks during major holidays like Christmas, around the time of big sporting events like the Super Bowl, and in the wake of elections. This study is the first to look for any genetic underpinnings that might explain this trend, and the scientists struck gold when they identified a group of people with higher susceptibility to stress.“We now understand that there are certain factors driving this increase in heart attacks in those who are at increased risk,” said Abohashem.Data from almost 18,500 individuals who provided information and blood samples for inclusion in the Mass General Brigham Biobank were analyzed. Among the health metrics collected for each person was a score called the neuroticism polygenic risk score (nPRS), a well-established measure of someone’s genetic predisposition to stress.During the 20-year study period, between 2000 and 2020, 1,890 participants experienced acute coronary syndrome (ACS), which encompasses heart attacks and other conditions that suddenly cut off blood supply to part of the heart muscle. People whose nPRS was above the median were found to be 34 percent more likely to experience ACS during stressful times, even when other factors like smoking status, alcohol consumption, and diabetes were taken into account.High-nPRS individuals were also more prone to anxiety and depression, and this too compounded their risk of ACS, with those experiencing these psychological symptoms being 3.2 times more likely to have a cardiac event during a stressful period.The “high stress” periods included for the purpose of this research were the immediate aftermath of presidential elections and sporting events involving local teams (including the Super Bowl and NBA playoffs), as well as the 10 days following Christmas. These times were compared with other days of the year as a control.Now that we’ve identified a population that could be at heightened risk of a cardiac emergency at certain times, Abohashem hopes we might be able to intervene to help mitigate this risk: “We could potentially target those people with screenings and dual-benefit interventions, such as exercise, yoga, mindfulness or other approaches that are associated with reductions in anxiety and depression and also with lowering cardiovascular risk.”The researchers note that a limitation of this study is its retrospective nature – that means we can’t definitively say that there is a causal link between depression/anxiety in people predisposed to stress and ACS risk. In the future, prospective studies could help scientists gain a clearer understanding of this relationship. Abohashem also highlighted the gaps in mental healthcare that exist in the US, with some patients facing barriers to accessing the support they need. Technological solutions are helping with this to some degree, such as more telehealth appointments, but there may be more that primary care providers can do to steer people towards self-help strategies like exercise and better sleep hygiene.To be fair, the news cycle in the run-up to an election is enough to keep anyone awake at night. Might we suggest catching up on the latest and greatest science news instead?The study was presented at the American College of Cardiology’s Annual Scientific Session.   [H/T: The Hill]

The evening network news coverage of PPresident Joe Biden’s upcoming executive order on the border crisis was, for the most part, predictably focused on the politics of the matter. And, across the board, this coverage unanimously omitted one piece of major news. Most representative of this coverage was the CBS Evening News. Watch the full report, as aired on Monday, June 3rd, 2024 (click “expand” to view transcript): CBS EVENING NEWS 6/3/24 6:38 PM NORAH O’DONNELL: President Biden is under intense political pressure to curb illegal immigration. It's a top concern for voters, one that Donald Trump and his allies have seized on. And tomorrow Biden is expected to take action issuing a major executive order allowing him to partially shut down the asylum process at the southern border. CBS News was the first to break the story, and tonight our Nancy Cordes is at The White House. Nancy, good to see you. So I understand this is going to be the most restrictive border policy ever enacted by a Democratic president, why now? NANCY CORDES: Well, Norah, The White House had been hoping that Congress would take this step. It didn’t. This represents a major change to immigration policy, and we’re told that the president is going to sign this executive order tomorrow. CBS News has learned that this new order will allow U.S. immigration officials to deport migrants without processing their asylum claims any time the number of illegal border crossings tops a specific threshold, and sources tell CBS that threshold is likely to be 2500 migrant apprehensions a day. Which means this partial ban could be triggered on day one because the number of apprehensions at the southern border in May was higher than that. It was 3800 a day according to the Border Patrol. Right now, of course, asylum-seekers are allowed to stay in the U.S. until their case is processed, which can take years. And critics say that creates an incentive for those who don't qualify to come to the U.S. anyway. This new executive order is almost certainly going to face legal challenges down the road. The White House appears to be going this route now because Republicans rejected a bipartisan senate deal that would have done something similar. Norah. O’DONNELL: Nancy Cordes with that big news tonight. Thank you so much. You have it all, really. CBS’s report boils down to concerns over Biden’s electoral prospects, and lamentations over the fact that Republicans didn’t codify 4,999 illegal crossings into law- leaving Biden to use executive authority to try to fix the mess he made via executive authority when he ripped the border open on Day One. ABC News followed a similar pattern: RACHEL SCOTT: Tonight, President Biden preparing to take his most aggressive action on immigration yet, with plans to issue an executive order to effectively shut down the border to asylum seekers when migrant crossings surge. Sources tell ABC News when daily encounters reach 2,500 between ports of entry, asylum seekers would be turned away. The move could have an immediate impact. Migrant crossings have averaged 3,500 a day in recent weeks. The president, keenly aware that immigration is a top issue for voters, has been weighing how he can act alone, after Donald Trump urged Republicans to block a bipartisan deal their own party negotiated. Protect the Precious at all times, in and out of season. NBC took a significantly different approach in that Telemundo anchor Julio Vaqueiro steered away from domestic political implications and covered the likely meltdown to come from the Immigration-Industrial Complex: LINDSAY TOCZYLOWSKI: This really what sounds like a draconian and potentially unlawful immigration shutdown of the border. Vaqueiro closed out his coverage by exposing a major loophole in the executive order: The unaccompanied minors exception. VAQUEIRO: Today President Biden spoke with Mexico’s president-elect. As for tomorrow's executive action, it’s expected to include some exceptions,humanitarian exceptions including one for unaccompanied children.  That exception becomes increasingly relevant when taking notice of the related news item suppressed across the dial: the Biden administration’s decision to kill 350,000 asylum cases- effectively, a mass amnesty. As reported by the indispensable Jennie Taer over at The New York Post: While the Biden administration is attempting to look like it’s getting tough on the border, behind the scenes it’s operating a program of “mass amnesty” for migrants, The Post can reveal. Data show that since 2022, more than 350,000 asylum cases filed by migrants have been closed by the US government if the applicants don’t have a criminal record or are otherwise not deemed a threat to the country. This means that while the migrants are not granted or denied asylum — their cases are “terminated without a decision on the merits of their asylum claim” — they are removed from the legal system and no longer required to check in with authorities. The move allows them to legally, indefinitely roam the US without fear of deportation, effectively letting them slip through the cracks. That’s kind of a super important point to cover when reporting on matters pertaining to immigration and the border. But, as always, the Regime Media’s focus is to Protect the Precious and to cast President Biden as the purest, truest victim of any of a wide assortment of (often self-induced) calamities.  SORR OF UNRELATED NOTE BUT NOT REALLY: It was refreshing to watch folks actually SPEAKING ENGLISH on a network newscast (as did Telemundo anchor Julio Vaqueiro for NBC and TelevisaUnivision anchor Enrique Acevedo for CBS during their respective coverages of the election of Claudia Sheinbaum as the next president of Mexico), as opposed to the weird, verby Newspeak so prevalent today.  Click “expand” to view the full transcripts of the aforementioned reports as aired on their respective newscasts on Monday, June 3rd, 2024: ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT ABC WORLD NEWS TONIGHT 6/3/24 6:35 PM DAVID MUIR: Meanwhile, there is a developing headline tonight involving the U.S./Mexico border. This evening, sources now say President Biden is preparing to take tough executive action on immigration, including shutting the border when the number of asylum seekers reaches 2,500. It would trigger an immediate shutdown. It comes tonight as the new president of Mexico, their first woman president, a physicist and engineer, has already signaled she will work with the U.S. on immigration. Rachel Scott at the White House. RACHEL SCOTT: Tonight, President Biden preparing to take his most aggressive action on immigration yet, with plans to issue an executive order to effectively shut down the border to asylum seekers when migrant crossings surge. Sources tell ABC News when daily encounters reach 2,500 between ports of entry, asylum seekers would be turned away. The move could have an immediate impact. Migrant crossings have averaged 3,500 a day in recent weeks. The president, keenly aware that immigration is a top issue for voters, has been weighing how he can act alone, after Donald Trump urged Republicans to block a bipartisan deal their own party negotiated. JOE BIDEN: There's no guarantee that I have that power all by myself without legislation. And some have suggested I should just go ahead and try it. SCOTT: The U.S. has seen a record 6.4 million illegal border crossings during the Biden administration. Officials say the numbers have dipped in recent months, because Mexico is cracking down on their side of the border. And the U.S. will soon have a new partner. Mexico tonight electing its first woman and first Jewish president, Claudia Sheinbaum, the former mayor of Mexico City, a physicist with a doctorate in energy engineering who won the Nobel Peace Prize. Sheinbaum is vowing to continue the policies of outgoing president Lopez Obrador working to control the flow of migrants. And David, and back to that executive order, this could have an immediate impact for those who are seeking asylum. The number of migrant encounters at the border already far exceeds that threshold. The White House and the Biden administration fully aware this will likely be challenged in court. David. MUIR: Rachel Scott with a developing headline from The White House tonight. Rachel, thank you. NBC NIGHTLY NEWS: NBC NIGHTLY NEWS 6/3/24 7:06 PM LESTER HOLT: Facing high numbers of migrant crossings at the border, NBC News has learned President Biden is expected to take executive action tomorrow, right on the heels of Mexico's historic presidential election. Telemundo's Julio Vaqueiro is in Mexico City. JULIO VAQUEIRO: Facing mounting pressure over his handling of the border, NBC News has learned that the Biden administration is expected to announce a sweeping executive action that would allow the president to temporarily shut down the border if the number of illegal crossings reaches 2,500 a day, according to three people familiar to the discussions. There are currently more than 4,000 illegal border crossings every day according to Homeland Security, suggesting a shutdown could go into effect immediately. This policy is a reversal from the president's stance in January. JOE BIDEN: I've done all I can do. VAQUEIRO: With the presidential election approaching, Mr. Trump routinely slams president Biden over his handling of the border. DONALD TRUMP: They're pouring through every state, every state is now a border state. VAQUEIRO: Now President Biden is trying to institute restrictions similar to those Mr. Trump tried to enact in 2018, which courts struck down. LINDSAY TOCZYLOWSKI: This really what sounds like a draconian and potentially unlawful immigration shutdown of the border. VAQUEIRO: This announcement, on the heels of history in Mexico. CLAUDIA SHEINBAUM: ¡Viva Mexico! [ Cheers ] VAQUEIRO: Claudia Sheinbaum won yesterday's presidential election, becoming the first woman and the first Jewish president in the country's 200-year history. The climate scientist and former mayor of Mexico City will now be tasked with working with the U.S. to contain the flow of migrants at the border. ANA MARIA SALAZAR SLACK: I'm sure we're not going to have any major announcements of changes or proposals until it’s defined- find out who's the next President of the United States. VAQUEIRO: Today President Biden spoke with Mexico’s president-elect. As for tomorrow's executive action, it’s expected to include some exceptions,humanitarian exceptions including one for unaccompanied children. Lester. HOLT: Julio Vaqueiro. Thank you.