29 C
New York
Friday, July 4, 2025
Home Blog Page 12

TD Cowen maintains Buy rating on Aurinia Pharmaceuticals shares at $11

0


TD Cowen reiterates Buy rating on Aurinia Pharmaceuticals stock at $11

Tropical Storm Flossie Tracking Map

0

Flossie was a tropical storm in the North Pacific Ocean Monday morning Mexico Central Time, the National Hurricane Center said in its latest advisory.

The tropical storm had sustained wind speeds of 60 miles per hour.

 All times on the map are Mexico Central Time. By The New York Times

The outer bands of Flossie were expected to bring locally heavy rainfall to the Mexican states of Oaxaca, Guerrero, Michoacán, Colima and Jalisco through midweek. Rainfall totals between three and six inches were expected, with isolated totals of 10 inches.

The Hurricane Center warned that the rain may lead to life-threatening flooding and mudslides, particularly in areas of steep terrain.

A tropical storm warning was issued for portions of southwestern Mexico, where tropical storm conditions were expected late on Monday through Tuesday.

What does the storm look like from above?

Satellite imagery can help determine the strength, size and cohesion of a storm. The stronger a storm becomes, the more likely an eye will form in the center. When the eye looks symmetrical, that often means the storm is not encountering anything to weaken it.

Satellite image of the storm.

Flossie is the sixth named storm to form in the Eastern Pacific in 2025.

Storms that form in the Atlantic or the Pacific generally move west, meaning Atlantic storms pose a greater threat to North America. If a storm forms in the Pacific close to land, it can bring damaging winds and rain before pushing out to sea.

However, an air mass can sometimes block a storm, driving it north or northeast toward the Baja California peninsula and the west coast of Mexico. Occasionally, a storm can move farther north, as Hurricane Hilary did in 2023, bringing damaging winds and intense rain to Southern California.

Hurricane season in the Eastern Pacific began on May 15, two weeks before the Atlantic season. Both seasons run through Nov. 30.

Sources and notes

Tracking map Tracking data is from the National Hurricane Center. The map shows probabilities of at least 5 percent. The forecast is for up to five days, with that time span starting up to three hours before the reported time that the storm reaches its latest location. Wind speed probability data is not available north of 60.25 degrees north latitude.

Wind arrivals table Arrival times are generated from a New York Times analysis of National Hurricane Center data. Geographic locations use data from the U.S. Census Bureau and Natural Earth. Time zones are based on Google. The table shows predicted arrival times of sustained, damaging winds of 58 m.p.h. or more for select cities with a chance of such winds reaching them. If damaging winds reach a location, there is no more than a 10 percent chance that they will arrive before the “earliest reasonable” time and a 50 percent chance they will arrive before the “most likely” time.

Radar map Radar imagery is from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration via Iowa State University. These mosaics are generated by combining individual radar stations that comprise the NEXRAD network.

Storm surge map Storm surge data is from the National Hurricane Center. Forecasts only include the United States Gulf and Atlantic coasts, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The actual areas that could become flooded may differ from the areas shown on this map. This map accounts for tides, but not waves and not flooding caused by rainfall. The map also includes intertidal areas, which routinely flood during typical high tides.

Satellite map Imagery is from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Japanese Meteorological Agency via the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere.

Precipitation map Data for multi-day forecasts or observed rainfall totals are from the National Weather Service. The 1-day forecast is from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Warren Buffett gives away an additional $6 billion in Berkshire Hathaway stocks

0
  • Warren Buffett has given away another $6 billion. The latest philanthropic donation went largely to the Gates Foundation, with the remainder going to charities run by his children.

Warren Buffett has given away the biggest chunk of his fortune since he began distributing it in 2006.

The soon-to-be-former CEO of Berkshire Hathaway has donated 12.36 million Berkshire Class B shares, worth $6 billion, to the Gates Foundation and four family charities. The Gates Foundation received the majority of the shares, with a gift of 9.43 million.

Of the remaining nearly 3 million shares, 943,384 went to the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation. And 660,366 shares were given to three charities led by his children: the Howard G. Buffett Foundation, Sherwood Foundation (run by daughter Susie) and NoVo Foundation (run by his son Peter).

Buffett, 94, donated $5.3 billion in shares last June and distributed another $1.14 billion last November, in what has become a Thanksgiving tradition for him.

“Father time always wins,” he wrote in November. “But he can be fickle – indeed unfair and even cruel – sometimes ending life at birth or soon thereafter while, at other times, waiting a century or so before paying a visit. To date, I’ve been very lucky, but, before long, he will get around to me.”

Buffett, last month, announced he would be stepping down as CEO of Berkshire Hathaway at the end of the year. In a preview of his will, he noted that donations to the Gates Foundation will end following his death, with most of his fortune being funneled into a new charitable trust that will be overseen by his children—and the three must decide unanimously on how the money is distributed, he said.

Buffett is currently ranked as the world’s eighth richest person on the Bloomberg Billionaire Index, with a value of $152 billion.

Introducing the 2025 Fortune 500, the definitive ranking of the biggest companies in America. Explore this year’s list.

Trump’s Tax Bill Faces Crucial Vote, Despite Controversy

0

NewsFeed

Republicans in the US are trying to get President Donald Trump’s ‘big, beautiful’ tax and spending bill passed by the Senate despite opposition from Democrats, who say it will be the most expensive bill in history while giving benefits to the wealthy.

In Q2 2025, UK’s PPL distributed $133M to 139,000 performers and rightsholders

0

UK-based music licensing body PPL paid out £96.7 million (approx. $133 million at current exchange rates) to 139,000 performers and recording rightsholders in the second quarter of 2025.

The latest figure marks a 7%, or GBP £7 million ($9.6m), increase from the £103.7 million ($142m) paid in Q2 2024, which at the time marked the first time since the 90-year old organization surpassed the £100 million ($137m) mark in a single distribution.

The distribution mainly covers UK collections from public performance and broadcast licensing throughout 2024, as well as additional revenue streams from international markets, PPL announced Monday (June 30).

PPL’s latest report showed that over 6,400 performers and recording rightsholders received their first-ever PPL payment in the Q2 2025 cycle.

Since January, PPL has distributed a total of £167.8 million ($230m) to performers and recording rightsholders, either as direct PPL members or through partnerships with international collective management organizations (CMOs).

“As things have grown, it’s meant a lot to know that they’re making sure I’m paid properly when my songs are played in public or broadcast, in the UK and abroad. I really appreciate the work they do.”

Cat Burns, Singer-Songwriter

Beyond domestic UK collections, the Q2 payment includes substantial contributions from CMOs in France, the Netherlands, Japan, Norway and the US. Some payments reflect 2025 airplay revenue from both US and Dutch markets.

Singer and songwriter Cat Burns, who generated airplay in the UK with her tracks Go and People Pleaser, said: “PPL has played an important role in my journey. As things have grown, it’s meant a lot to know that they’re making sure I’m paid properly when my songs are played in public or broadcast, in the UK and abroad. I really appreciate the work they do.”

Chris Barton, Chief Financial Officer, PPL added: “At PPL our purpose is to ensure that our members’ talent and investment is fairly rewarded when their recorded music is broadcast or played in public places in the UK and around the world.”

“We know PPL distribution days can be significant for our members and we work hard to maximize and deliver payments consistently to them throughout the year. We’re proud to collect revenue on their behalf and help ensure performers and recording rightsholders are fairly rewarded for their work.”

PPL noted that the Annual Supplementary Remuneration Fund, established following changes to copyright protection terms for sound recordings, continues expanding its international scope.

Following previous payments from Ireland and Netherlands in March, this distribution marks the first ASR payment from France’s Société des Artistes Interprètes, covering airplay between 2014 and 2024.

“We know PPL distribution days can be significant for our members and we work hard to maximize and deliver payments consistently to them throughout the year. We’re proud to collect revenue on their behalf and help ensure performers and recording rightsholders are fairly rewarded for their work.”

Chris Barton, PPL

PPL added that recording rightsholders received significant payments from CMOs in Belgium, Hungary, the Netherlands and Sweden. Additionally, over £1.1 million ($1.5m) was distributed to 278 recording rightsholders via PPL’s sister company VPL for music video licensing when broadcast or played in public venues.

In 2024, PPL’s full-year revenue rose 6% YoY to GBP £301 million ($384.4m at the average exchange rate for 2024) from the previous record of £283.5 million ($352.6m) set in 2023.

Music Business Worldwide

Key witness in corruption case involving former Peru Mayor Susana Villarán discovered deceased

0

A key witness in the corruption case of a former mayor of Peru’s capital, Lima, has been found dead at his home, Peruvian prosecutors say, less than three months before the trial is due to start.

José Miguel Castro, who was living under house arrest, was a municipality official during Susana Villarán’s term as mayor from 2011 to 2014.

He was a co-defendant in the trial with Ms Villarán, who is accused of receiving bribes worth $10m (£7.3m) from Brazilian construction firms.

In 2019, Ms Villarán admitted to receiving funds from these companies but denied that they were bribes. Mr Castro was collaborating with prosecutors on the investigation. The cause of his death is not yet known.

“He was the second most important person behind Ms Villarán,” prosecutor José Domingo Pérez told Peruvian news channel Canal N.

“We were expecting his valuable contribution” to the trial, he added.

Ms Villarán, 75, is accused of collusion, money laundering and forming a criminal organisation that received millions of dollars from construction companies Odebrecht – now called Novonor – and OAS.

Prosecutors said Mr Castro was the alleged criminal organisation’s second-in-command.

In 2019 Ms Villarán admitted taking funds from Odebrecht and OAS to finance her 2013 mayoral campaign to stay in office, but denied they constituted bribes.

The trial is due to start on 23 September.

Ms Villarán is one of a number of Peruvian politicians implicated in the Odebrecht scandal.

In 2016 the Brazilian construction giant admitted to bribing officials across Latin America and parts of Africa in order to obtain construction contracts.

A number of former Peruvian presidents have since been investigated, including Ollanta Humala, who was sentenced to 15 years in prison earlier this year, and Alejandro Toledo, who was sentenced to more than 20 years in prison last year.

Another former leader, Alan Garcia, killed himself as authorities arrived at his house to arrest him in 2019.

An investigation against another former president, Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, is ongoing. He denies the charges.

Ukraine’s plight cannot be hidden by NATO’s summit.

0

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

“Daddy’s home,” proclaimed the White House, hailing Donald Trump’s return from last week’s Nato summit. That social media post was a reference — at once triumphant and mocking — to the title bestowed on Trump by Mark Rutte, the Nato secretary-general. Rutte might reason that demeaning himself is a small price to pay to keep the alliance together. And European leaders did seem broadly content, after the first Nato summit of Trump’s second term.

Fears of the US president walking out of the summit — or even the alliance itself — did not come to pass. All the European members of Nato have now committed to spending 5 per cent of GDP on defence — broadly defined.

One European leader lists three major achievements from the summit. First, Nato has refocused on its key mission — which is the deterrence of Russia. Second, the alliance is returning to cold war levels of defence spending, in response to Russia’s continuing military build-up. Third, as European defence spending rises, Nato will become a more balanced alliance between the US and Europe.

The fact that the Nato summit took place just after the US military strikes on Iran also changed the atmosphere. Trump arrived in a good mood — and his willingness to bomb Iran’s Fordow nuclear site allayed European fears that he will always shy away from the use of force. Trump also had a friendly meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine, repairing some of the damage that was done after the two leaders’ disastrous White House meeting in February.

But while things are going better for Ukraine diplomatically, the war itself seems to be going worse. Some Nato leaders fear that the situation on the frontline could deteriorate seriously by this autumn. That would be far more significant than any paper commitments made in last week’s Nato communiqué. Military assessments suggest that both the Russian and Ukrainian militaries are nearing the point of exhaustion. But while Russia can probably keep up the current level of operations for another year, Ukraine may reach a breaking point within six months — if it does not receive significant new military support.

Following the positive Zelenskyy-Trump meeting, there are hopes that Ukraine may receive fresh supplies from the US of Patriot missile-defence systems, as well as Himars artillery rockets. With Ukraine’s air defences stretched thin, the Patriots are badly needed. But, as ever, Trump was vague about providing new munitions — and could easily change his mind or forget.

There are also some shortfalls — in particular in Ukrainian troop numbers — that the country’s western allies cannot fix. Russia is now thought to have lost more than a million troops, killed or wounded, in the conflict. But Ukrainian losses have also been heavy and Russia’s population is about four times larger than Ukraine’s.

The increased intensity of Russian missile attacks on Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities is also damaging Ukrainian morale. Without a clear vision of victory — or at least of an end to the war — a sense of hopelessness risks descending over the country.

The change in mood inside the Ukrainian government is reflected in the urgency with which it is now privately calling for a ceasefire. A year or two ago, such calls would have been regarded as defeatism. Now they are made with increasing insistence in closed-door meetings between Ukrainian and western leaders.

But there is little belief among European policymakers that Russia is in any mood to agree a ceasefire. One well-placed official thinks that Russia’s central goal now is to capture Odesa — which Vladimir Putin regards as a historically Russian city. Without Odesa, Ukraine would lose access to its main port.

A group of former European leaders — including Carl Bildt of Sweden and Sanna Marin of Finland — visited Ukraine recently and picked up on the deteriorating mood. They wrote afterwards that “while Ukrainians will never stop resisting, without more military support, Ukraine can lose more territory. More cities might be captured.” Off the record, some western officials are even bleaker, warning of a risk of “catastrophic failure”, if the Ukrainian military is stretched to breaking point — and does not receive a significant increase in military and financial aid from its western allies.

Of course, wars are unpredictable and moods can shift. Some in the west argue that Ukraine can hold its own over the coming year. They claim that, despite enormous efforts and losses, Russia has only succeeded in capturing an additional 0.25 per cent of Ukrainian territory over the past year. The optimists argue that Ukrainians’ expertise in drone warfare has made it impossible for large groups of Russian troops to advance en masse. They also argue that — even if Russia breaks through Ukrainian lines — it lacks the mechanised divisions to capitalise on the achievement.

The received wisdom has been proved wrong many times before in this war. But if the growing pessimism among those following the Ukraine war closely is justified, then any feel-good sentiments generated by the Nato summit may soon disappear. Nato’s secretary-general is known for his upbeat nature and permanent smile. But even Rutte could struggle to keep smiling by the end of the year.

gideon.rachman@ft.com

Contrasting Popovici’s 46.71 with Pan’s 46.40 in the 100 Free World Record

0

Less than 24 hours ago, former 100 freestyle world record holder David Popovici took over the world lead with a sizzling 46.71. The time was faster than his previous world record, the fastest in the world this year, and now stands as the second-fastest performance in history behind Pan Zhanle‘s 46.40 from the Paris Olympic final.

These two look to be both the present and the long-term future of the event. Both are 20 years old and could remain key players in the sport for several more Olympic cycles. While there are other contenders in the event, we wanted to take a detailed look at how Pan and Popovici’s races compare, who was stronger in each phase of the race, and what Popovici could still improve, at least on paper, to make another push for the world record.

First, we’ll start with Pan’s world record from Paris and break down the numbers.

Race Summary

Key times Averages Splits
Reaction time 0.62 Velocity m/s 2.16 1st half 22.28
Start time (first 15m) 5.45 Stroke rate 52.52 2nd half 24.12
Finish time (last 5m) 2.38 DPS 2.44 Drop-off 1.84
Total time 46.40 Turn 9.23 First 50 time % 48.02
Underwater 10.45 Second 50 time % 51.98

Race Details

Distance Time 25s 50s Velocity Underwater swim (m) Stroke rate Stroke count DPS Turns
0-15m 5.45 2.75 12.8
15-25m 4.56 10.01 2.19 54.7 2.40
25-35m 4.86 2.06 51.6 2.39
35-45m 4.75 2.11 51.3 2.46
45-50m 2.66 12.27 22.28 1.88 53.1 30
45-65m 9.23 2.17 8.1 9.23
65-75m 4.92 11.49 2.03 49.3 2.47
75-85m 5.12 1.95 48.6 2.41
85-95m 5.13 1.95 47.1 2.48
95-100m 2.38 12.63 24.12 1.89 47.6 34

Next, let’s dive into how Popovici’s race unfolded.

Race Summary

Key times Averages Splits
Reaction time 0.63 Velocity m/s 2.14 1st half 22.73
Start time (first 15m) 5.42 Stroke rate 51.08 2nd half 23.98
Finish time (last 5m) 2.53 DPS 2.45 Drop-off 1.25
Total time 46.71 Turn 9.44 First 50 time % 48.66
Underwater 10.30 Second 50 time % 51.34

Race Details

Distance Time 25s 50s Velocity Underwater swim (m) Stroke rate Stroke count DPS Turns
0-15m 5.42 2.77 12.9
15-25m 4.68 10.10 2.14 53.3 2.41
25-35m 4.86 2.06 50.0 2.47
35-45m 4.80 2.08 50.0 2.50
45-50m 2.97 12.63 22.73 1.68 50.8 30
45-65m 9.44 2.12 7.7 9.44
65-75m 5.00 11.47 2.00 49.7 2.41
75-85m 5.02 1.99 49.5 2.42
85-95m 4.96 2.02 48.9 2.47
95-100m 2.53 12.51 23.98 1.78 51.7 35

Now, let’s take a closer look at how the two races stack up against each other.

Key Times

POPOVICI PAN
Total time 46.71 46.40
Reaction time 0.63 0.62
Start time (s) 5.42 5.45
25m time (s) 10.1 10.01
Finish time (s) 2.53 2.38

Cumulative Splits

POPOVICI PAN
25m 10.10 10.01
50m 22.73 22.28
75m 34.20 33.77
100m 46.71 46.40

25m Splits

POPOVICI PAN
1st 25m 10.10 10.01
2nd 25m 12.63 12.27
3rd 25m 11.47 11.49
4th 25m 12.51 12.63

50m Splits 

POPOVICI PAN
1st 50m 22.73 22.28
2nd 50m 23.98 24.12

Turn Times (45m to 65m)

POPOVICI PAN
Turn 9.44 9.23

Stroke Counts

POPOVICI PAN
Lap 1 30 30
Lap 2 35 34

Measurement Averages

POPOVICI PAN
Velocity (m/s) 2.14 2.16
Stroke Rate (str/min) 51.08 52.52
DPS (m) 2.45 2.44

Velocity Graph

Stroke Rate Graph

Distance-Per-Stroke Graph

Popovici closed faster than Pan, splitting 23.98 on the second 50 compared to Pan’s 24.12. That made Popovici the first swimmer to ever to close a 100 free in under 24 seconds. Popovici also had a smaller drop-off from his first 50 to second 50, 1.25 seconds compared to Pan’s 1.84, showing better back-half control. His distance per stroke was slightly higher at 2.45 meters compared to Pan’s 2.44, and he was faster on both the third 25, 11.47 to 11.49, and the final 25, 12.51 to 12.63. Remarkably, both swimmers maintained their DPS throughout their entire races, a rare feat, even among elite-level sprinters.

Popovici’s pure speed has been trending upward throughout the year. He broke 22 seconds in the individual 50 free for the first time at the Romanian Nationals in April, posting a 21.83 for a new Romanian record, and followed that up with a 21.86 this week. That emphasis suggests he’s fully aware it’s an area that needs to improve.

Pan’s opening 50 was 22.28 compared to Popovici’s 22.73, and the biggest gap came on the second 25, where Popovici was 0.36 seconds slower, 12.63 to Pan’s 12.27. Within that, the final 5 meters of the first 25 was especially costly: Popovici split 2.97 to Pan’s 2.66, accounting for 31 of the 36 hundredths alone. That represents not just a change in swim speed, but also the time it took to plant the legs onto the wall for the turn. The difference in their second 25 times alone was greater than the overall margin between their final times (0.31 seconds), while the difference over the final 5 meters and into the turn matched it exactly.

Pan’s reaction time was slightly better at 0.62 to 0.63, and he had the quicker final 5 meters at 2.38 compared to Popovici’s 2.53. He also covered more distance underwater at 10.45 meters versus the Romanian’s 10.30.

Pan held a higher average stroke rate at 52.52 compared to Popovici’s 51.08, and maintained a slightly better average velocity of 2.16 meters per second to Popovici’s 2.14. Interestingly, they both took 30 strokes over the first 50 meters, with Popovici taking one more on the way back: 35 to Pan’s 34.

In terms of race structure, Pan swam 48.02% of his time on the front half and 51.98% on the back. Popovici was slightly more back-loaded at 48.66% out and 51.34% back.

Watch both swims here:

Pan’s 46.40 world record, available via the official Olympics YouTube channel:

Popovici’s 46.71, available via SwimSphereTV on YouTube:

Special thanks to Dušan Danilović of the Slovenian Swimming Federation for his significant contributions to this article.

Israel fails to defend itself against Iran

0

Former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter says Iran learned from its latest conflict with Israel

Breakthrough in Solar Panel Recycling Achieves 99% Efficiency

0

After a distinguished life generating renewable energy, equipment like wind turbines and solar panels reach the end of their useful cycle and require recycling solutions that ensure their sustainability. As with other electrical and electronic devices, one key to efficient recycling is the separation of materials that make up the panels, which include aluminum frames, photovoltaic cells, glass coatings, and circuit metals. Significant advancements in solar panel recycling have been made thanks to research by a team at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Australia.

Key aspects of current solar panel recycling

Before delving into the new technique developed by the Australian researchers, it is essential to understand the main aspects of this type of recycling:

  1. Composition of solar panels: Solar panels are primarily composed of glass, aluminum, silicon, and small amounts of metals like silver and copper.
  2. Recycling process:
    1. Disassembly: Panels are dismantled to separate the glass, aluminum frame, and other components.
    2. Thermal treatment: Thermal treatment is used to evaporate adhesives and separate the silicon.
    3. Grinding and separation: The remaining materials are ground and separated using chemical and physical processes.
  3. Reuse of main materials:
    1. Aluminum and glass: These materials are recycled and used in the production of new solar panels or other industrial products.
    2. Silicon: Silicon recovered from photovoltaic cells can be reused in manufacturing new solar panels or in computing devices after purification.
    3. Metals: From the aluminum in frames to copper, tin, and zinc in electrical materials, metals from the panels can be recycled for various applications.

Achieving 99% recycling efficiency

As previously mentioned, the primary achievement of the UNSW team of scientists is reaching a 99% recovery rate of materials with their new solar panel recycling process. In addition to conventional techniques for larger elements, the method they developed uses stainless steel balls as abrasive agents, effectively separating valuable components from photovoltaic cells, including silicon and precious metals like silver. These metals account for 0.05% of the total weight but constitute 14% of the material value of each panel.

The process involves crushing solar cells into smaller particles, facilitating the separation and recovery of valuable materials without cross-contamination. These advancements significantly improve current solar panel recycling techniques, not only by disintegrating materials but also by doing so in a reduced timeframe, ranging from five to fifteen minutes.

This technique emerges as a promising solution at a time when a substantial increase in solar panel waste is expected, corresponding to the growth of photovoltaic energy in the European Union and the rest of the world. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), considering that the average lifespan of a solar panel is between twenty-five and thirty years, waste could reach eight million tons by 2030 and seventy-eight million tons by 2050.

Professor Chao Zhang, one of the project leaders, emphasizes that this method is not only efficient but also economically viable, indicating that this solar panel recycling technology has the potential to be scalable. Thus, the ability to recover nearly all valuable materials from solar panels could transform waste management in the photovoltaic industry, promote a circular economy, and reduce reliance on new natural resources.

Solar panel recycling is just one aspect of renewable energy. To learn more about the fate of other equipment, such as wind turbines, we recommend checking out this article about the second life of a wind turbine transformed into sneaker soles.

 

Source: