Category Archives: Singularity

Ducati is currently leading the world constructors championship with two wins (Bastianini), two second places (Martin and Zarco) and a third (Zarco) to its name. Actually there is also a third place for Jackass in Austin, Texas but since that Grand Prix was won by the 'Beast', the points for the constructors on that occasion were brought home by the Gresini team rider.

The singularity, as far as Ducati is concerned, therefore, is that despite having an official team and three satellite teams on the track - Pramac, Gresini and Mooney - not even one single point for the world constructors championship has been scored by the two titular riders, Bagnaia and Miller, seeing as only the best bike counts at the finish line, as is logical, otherwise the manufacturer with the most bikes on the track would win.

It is obvious, however, that the more bikes a manufacturer lines up on the grid, the more chances there are of getting at least one into the positions that matter, but that's another story.

Since the Sepang tests it has been said that the new GP22 had greater potential than the previous one, but then both Pecco and Jack asked not to use the very latest version of the engine, accusing the latter of being too aggressive at the first touch of the throttle. Then came the problem of the front lowering device, banned for 2023. Certainly not the best start to the season for Gigi Dall'Igna who, quite rightly so, saw time and money invested in the development of innovations not entirely appreciated by his own riders, but approved by the test rider, Michele Pirro. One wonders, at this point, whether too much meat has been put on the fire or, more simply, Bagnaia and Miller have not started the season completely on the ball.

After five races, in fact, they are both 38 points from the top of the championship in 9th and 10th position, with almost half of Bastianini's points. And it would be more without Eneas mistake at Portimao.

In short, Ducati has a lot to recriminate: none of its riders have always scored points so far. Bastianini crashed in Portimao, Bagnaia in Losail (bringing Martin down), Miller crashed in Portugal (in the accident with Mir) and retired at Losail with an unidentified problem. Martin crashed in three out of five races, the first time in Qatar without blame. In any case, too many. Conclusion: the GP22 has been criticized, but if we look at the situation in detail it seems to us, rather, that something has gone wrong at the level of human resources potential management. Pecco has suffered from not being able to pick up where he left off the 2021 season; Jack seems to be at the same performance level, and so do Zarco and Martin, a fast but still not very consistent rider. As for Luca Marini and rookie Marco Bezzecchi it can only be said that they are both fast, especially in practice.

It must be said that the world championship is still largely within the reach of the Rosse of Borgo Panigale, given the current situation but be careful: the next circuits are in favour of Quartararo and his Yamaha. Special measures are required, i.e. start winning races with the titular riders, preferably with one rider, because the risk is of wasting points.

Of course if Enea hadn't crashed - he was 11th at the time, behind Pol Espargar - perhaps he would have arrived a little further up, even taking account of how the Grand Prix eventually panned out. But there again, you dont win many championships with ifs and buts

Go here to see the original:

MotoGP, Ducati singularity: leading the world manufacturers championship, but without Bagnaia and Miller - GPOne.com

The Apex Legends Global Series Split 2 Playoffs, where competitors from across the world will compete for a share of the $1,000,000 prize pool, start on Friday. Here are a few of the 40 teams from each participating region to keep an eye on during the ALGS Split 2 playoffs.

TSM are an obvious pick for something like this, as they won the NA Split 1 playoffs after shaky performances during the regular season. Though they placed seventh overall in the NA Split 2, that was enough to qualify for the ALGS Split 2 playoffs, which is clearly all this squad needs to perform their best.

The newly signed OpTic Gaming squad (formerly Esports Arena) have proven theyre a force to be reckoned with on the NA servers. As ESA, they took the top spot in NA Pro League for Split 2 and all three took top spots on the NA Split 2 kills leaderboard.

NRG were one of the best and most consistent squads during Split 2. Though they werent able to outscore ESA, they did win multiple match days and have proven they can show up in a competition when they need to.

Brazils Elevate were the fourth place South American team for Split 2. It seems like theyre doing pretty well in the international scrims, so expect a solid performance from them in this tournament.

Another Brazilian powerhouse, Fnix Team scored a whopping 129 points to qualify for the ALGS Split 2 playoffs the third highest score out of all five regions. They were only outdone by one point in their own region, just barely losing out to Team Singularitys 130.

Team Singularity took the second highest score out of all five regions to qualify and have simply looked monstrous. With a long LAN tournament ahead of them, the Latin American squad seem poised for another impressive performance on the international stage.

SCARZ Europe came in ninth for the Europe, Middle East and Africa region Split 2, which is an accomplishment in and of itself but probably hides their real potential going into this tournament. This SCARZ squad was able to consistently show up on the top three of match day leaderboards and take wins.

Element 6 were formerly known as 69iQ Esports, but while they recently rebranded, they are still currently an independent organization. Despite seeming like underdogs in that sense, Element 6 performed well in Split 1 (fourth), the Split 1 playoffs (fifth) and Split 2 (tenth). This consistency makes them a threat in a competition that rewards those who are able to both kill and take placements.

Acend are the clear pick for teams to look out for as the winners of the EMEA Split 1 playoffs, back when they were still the unsigned NEW Esports roster. They looked good this split as well, placing fifth overall for EMEA. Theyre likely looking to secure a repeat of their Split 1 playoffs performance, and since their colleagues on the Acend VALORANT roster have already secured international victories, the Apex squad will probably want to be next.

Crazy Raccoon have shown significant improvement this split. After placing 12th in the APAC North Split 1 playoffs, they proceeded to take second overall for the Split 2 season, behind the APAC Norths current front-runners, South Korean aDRaccoon.

REJECT are another Japanese Apex team who have seen some solid improvement going into these playoffs. They went from seventh place in Split 1 to fifth in Split 2 and theyve been boot camping with CR in Sweden, so theres definitely even more room for them to pop off at these playoffs.

GameWith were the third place team in APAC North Split 2. The Japanese organization is ready to take a win on an international stage and if they can get on the same level as Crazy Raccoon and aDRaccon, theyll be in a good spot.

Now that Noyan Genburten Ozkose has tested negative for COVID-19 and is scrimming again, APAC Souths number one team after Split 2 should be back in fighting shape during the tournament. Since they wont be playing with a substitute, the Australian squad are definitely ones to watch out for. They got the highest score out of any team in any region to qualify with 134 points.

Another Australian team, Team Burger, looked very good in Split 2. They finished the season out with 125 points, narrowly missing the second place spot in their region to Sutoraiku, who got 126. Theyre a high scoring team, which is always dangerous in these competitions.

Freeagents, as you might guess, are an unsigned Indonesian roster with an Indian coach. Though they werent quite as high scoring as the other two teams here, they still broke 100 points on their path to qualification and made it to the playoffs from a region that only had five slots available.

Originally posted here:

Teams to watch from each region in the ALGS Split 2 playoffs - Upcomer

Even during times of conflict on the ground, space has historically been an arena of collaboration among nations. But trends in the past decade suggest that the nature of cooperation in space is shifting, and fallout from Russias invasion of Ukraine has highlighted these changes.

Im an international relations scholar who studies power distributions in spacewho the main players are, what capabilities they possess, and whom they decide to cooperate with. Some scholars predict a future in which single states pursue various levels of dominance, while others foresee a scenario in which commercial entities bring nations together.

But I believe that the future may be different. In the past few years, groups of nations with similar strategic interests on Earth have come together to further their interests in space, forming what I call space blocs.

The US and the Soviet Union dominated space activities during the Cold War. Despite tensions on the ground, both acted carefully to avoid causing crises and even cooperated on a number of projects in space.

As more countries developed their own space agencies, several international collaborative groups emerged. These include the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, and the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems.

In 1975, 10 European nations founded the European Space Agency. In 1998, the US and Russia joined efforts to build the International Space Station, which is now supported by 15 countries.

These multinational ventures were primarily focused on scientific collaboration and data exchange.

The European Space Agency, which now includes 22 nations, could be considered among the first space blocs. But a more pronounced shift toward this type of power structure can be seen after the end of the Cold War. Countries that shared interests on the ground began coming together to pursue specific mission objectives in space, forming space blocs.

In the past five years, several new space blocs have emerged with various levels of space capabilities. These include the African Space Agency, with 55 member states; the Latin American and Caribbean Space Agency, with 7 member states; and the Arab Space Coordination Group, with 12 Middle Eastern member states.

These groups allow for nations to collaborate closely with others in their blocs, but the blocs also compete with one another. Two recent space blocsthe Artemis Accords and the Sino-Russian lunar agreementare an example of such competition.

No human has been on the moon in 50 years, but in the next decade, both the US-led Artemis Accords and a Chinese-Russian mission aim to establish moon bases. Credit: NASA/Neil Armstrong via WikimediaCommons

The Artemis Accords were launched in October 2020. They are led by the US and currently include 18 country members. The groups goal is to return people to the moon by 2025 and establish a governing framework for exploring and mining on the moon, Mars and beyond. The mission aims to build a research station on the south pole of the moon with a supporting lunar space station called the Gateway.

Similarly, in 2019, Russia and China agreed to collaborate on a mission to send people to the south pole of the moon by 2026. This joint Sino-Russian mission also aims to eventually build a moon base and place a space station in lunar orbit.

That these blocs do not collaborate to accomplish similar missions on the moon indicates that strategic interests and rivalries on the ground have been transposed to space.

Any nation can join the Artemis Accords. But Russia and Chinaalong with a number of their allies on Earthhave not done so because some perceive the accords as an effort to expand the US-dominated international order to outer space.

Similarly, Russia and China plan to open their future lunar research station to all interested parties, but no Artemis country has expressed interest. The European Space Agency has even discontinued several joint projects it had planned with Russia and is instead expanding its partnerships with the US and Japan.

In addition to seeking power in space, countries are also using space blocs to strengthen their spheres of influence on the ground.

One example is the Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization, which was formed in 2005. Led by China, it includes Bangladesh, Iran, Mongolia, Pakistan, Peru, Thailand, and Turkey.

While its broad goal is the development and launch of satellites, the organizations major aim is to expand and normalize the use of the Chinese BeiDou navigation systemthe Chinese version of GPS. Countries that use the system could become dependent on China, as is the case of Iran.

There has been tremendous growth of commercial activities in space in the past decade. As a result, some scholars see a future of space cooperation defined by shared commercial interests. In this scenario, commercial entities act as intermediaries between states, uniting them behind specific commercial projects in space.

However, commercial enterprises are unlikely to dictate future international cooperation in space. According to current international space law, any company that operates in space does so as an extension ofand under the jurisdiction ofits home nations government.

The dominance of states over companies in space affairs has been starkly exemplified through the Ukraine crisis. As a result of state-imposed sanctions, many commercial space companies have stopped collaborating with Russia.

Given the current legal framework, it seems most likely that statesnot commercial entitieswill continue to dictate the rules in space.

I believe that going forward, state formationssuch as space blocswill serve as the major means through which states further their national interests in space and on the ground. There are many benefits when nations come together and form space blocs. Space is hard, so pooling resources, manpower, and know-how makes sense. However, such a system also comes with inherent dangers.

History offers many examples showing that the more rigid alliances become, the more likely conflict will ensue. The growing rigidity of two alliancesthe Triple Entente and the Triple Allianceat the end of 19th century is often cited as the key trigger of World War I.

A key lesson therein is that as long as existing space blocs remain flexible and open to all, cooperation will flourish and the world may yet avoid an open conflict in space. Maintaining the focus on scientific goals and exchanges between and within space blocswhile keeping political rivalries at baywill help to ensure the future of international cooperation in space.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Original post:

Space Blocs: The Future of International Cooperation in Space Is Splitting Along Lines of Power on Earth - Singularity Hub

The UAE is one of few countries in the world that has embraced the future by modernising its government systems, a leading strategist and digital transformation expert has said.

Salim Ismail, founding executive director of Singularity University, spoke at the fourth and final lecture of the Majlis Mohamed bin Zayed.

Mr Ismail is also the best-selling author of Exponential Organisations and Exponential Transformation and co-founder and chairman of OpenExO, a global community focused on innovation and digital transformation.

In a lecture titled How Technology Grows Organisations into the Future, he said the flexibility shown by the UAE in preparing for a digital future would allow it to quickly embrace new opportunities.

All of those old business models are completely gone and so we see as we digitise, we need completely new business models to operate in this new world subscription models, freemium models, advertising models, and so on, he said.

There are only two countries in the world that I think do future thinking properly. Singapore does it badly, you [the UAE] do it much better.

Because almost all public policy globally is created defensively and reactively, and by doing it proactively and saying we know what the future looks like, let's intercept those curves, you create unbelievable possibilities.

Sheikh Saif bin Zayed, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Interior, and Sheikh Nahyan bin Zayed, chairman of the board of trustees of Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan Charitable and Humanitarian Foundation, at the lecture. Photo: Ministry of Presidential Affairs

Speaking to an audience of officials, minsters and dignitaries, Mr Ismail said the UAE was able to adapt to the fast pace of changes brought about by technology and the disruptions they may bring.

We've never had this many technologies move this aggressively, all at the same time, Mr Ismail said.

Drones, for example, are doubling every nine months in their price-performance; the speed at which we can image the human brain is doubling every year.

And so, if you layer a solution on that technology, the solution scales along with the same underlying doubling pattern, which is why we're seeing so much disruption today.

Mr Ismail presented four key fundamentals for organisations wishing to keep pace with the future.

The first is to embrace transformative technology. The second is to structure an organisation, whether government or private, in such a way that it is able to adapt to major technological transformations. The third is to change the mentality of dealing with new ideas and the fourth is not being afraid of development and change.

Earlier this month, the UAE Cabinet approved a strategy in which the digital economy will contribute 20 per cent to the gross non-oil national economy in the coming years.

Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid, Prime Minister and Ruler of Dubai, said the Cabinet also approved the formation of a digital economy council.

The strategy aims to double the contribution of the digital economy to the UAE's GDP from 9.7 per cent to 19.4 per cent within the next 10 years.

The plan includes more than 30 initiatives, projects and programmes and five new areas of growth.

Updated: April 28, 2022, 5:39 AM

More:

Majlis Mohamed bin Zayed: UAE is ahead of digital curve - The National

Driverless buses may beat driverless cars in becoming a commonplace mode of transportation. It would make sense; buses run on fixed routes, always stop in the same places, dont need to go too fast, and since theyre bigger and heavier, could feel like a safer venue for passengers to get used to the lack of a human driver.

Self-driving buses or shuttles have been tested in Spain, China, Norway, Paris, and elsewhere. The newest addition to this list is Scotland, where technology company Fusion Processing, in partnership with bus company Stagecoach, started testing driverless buses this week. The 14-mile route runs between a park & ride lot and a train/tram interchange near Edinburgh.

Somewhat harrowingly, the route includes a long-span suspension bridge, Forth Road Bridge, which is over 2.5 kilometers long in total and runs 1,006 meters between its two main towers (thats 3,300 feet, a little over half the total span of the Brooklyn Bridge). Though perfectly safe, it seems a more unsettling location for a bus full of passengers with no human driver to break down than, well, not a long suspension bridge.

Luckily, the bus will have a safety driver on board, as all autonomous vehicles do during road tests. The buses are classified as having Level 4 autonomy; there are five levels of automation in driving, with Level 5 being full autonomy, in which the vehicle can drive itself anywhere (around cities, on highways, on rural roads, etc.) in any conditions (rain, sun, fog, etc.) without human intervention. Level 4 means a car can operate without a safety driver under certain conditions (namely, good weather), and will still have a steering wheel.

The steering wheel, gas, and brakes that safety drivers will use if they need to take over are separate from the system the buses use to navigate autonomously. During the initial two-week testing period, buses will run without passengers, but the companies involved are aiming to have riders on board by summer.

The self-driving software made by Fusion Processing, called CAVstar for connected and autonomous vehicles, isnt limited to radar, lidar, or cameras, but rather integrates all three. The buses are clearly marked as autonomous so nearby drivers are aware that a computers running the show. The question is, how much will this impact drivers behavior and relevant driving decisions? Would you feel less rude cutting off a driverless bus? More obliged to let it pass you? Or just sort of confused by the whole situation?

Each bus can carry 36 passengers, and the number of planned trips per day mean the autonomous buses could move up to 10,000 passengers a week. The projects leaders anticipate the self-driving buses reducing average trip time and improving schedule reliability of the route. This sounds like itll mostly be a good thing, but what will happen when, say, an elderly or disabled passenger needs some extra time to get on or off the bus?

The projects development included a phase where 500 local citizens gave the companies feedback about the autonomous bus service, including details about would make them feel comfortable as passengers on this type of service. Somewhat counter-intuitive to the whole concept of autonomy, people said they wanted a member of staff on board each buswhether thats a driver or a software engineer or a Captain, it seems people want the reassurance of being able to look to a human if something unexpected happens (like a bus breaking down halfway across a long-span suspension bridge).

Initial road testing will last two weeks. After that, Fusion Processing CEO Jim Hutchinson said in a press release, We look forward to welcoming passengers onboard in a few months time.

Image Credit: Fusion Processing

Continue reading here:

The UK's First Autonomous Passenger Bus Started Road Tests This Week - Singularity Hub

19th Annual What's Next Longevity Venture Summit features top investors in aging

LAFAYETTE, Calif., April 27, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Mary Furlong & Associates (MFA) announced its call for applications to entrepreneurs and startup companies for the 19th Annual What's Next Longevity Venture Summit $10,000 Business Plan Competition. The application deadline is May 6.

"After 19 years, we have showcased some of the top innovators in age-tech worldwide with many of our Business Plan Competition winners going on to win other large competitions such as the AARP'Disrupt Aging' national competition," said Mary Furlong, creator of the What's Next Longevity events. "This is not just winning $10,000 to fuel your idea. Finalists present to the top investors in this space as well as our virtual audience of potential distribution partners that offer invaluable strategic networking opportunities."

Leading in Longevity Business DealsFor nearly two decades the What's Next Longevity Venture Summit has focused on the longevity economy attracting a worldwide audience of more than 300 investors, entrepreneurs, senior living, home care, government agencies, nonprofits and other experts at the intersection of aging and technology. The event offers both learning and networking on the future trends to support an aging population with an economy based on people over age 50 that represents $8.3 trillion in spending today but will be $12.6 trillion by 2030 and will more than double in 2050 to $26.6 trillion.

Two thought leaders in investing and aging will keynote the event: Tom Kalil, chief innovation officer of Schmidt Ventures and former advisor to Presidents Obama and Clinton, and Sonia Arrison, founder of 100 Plus Capital and best-selling author and associate founder of Singularity University. The keynotes headline the hybrid three-day event with virtual programming June 6-7 and invitation-only in-person education and networking activities on June 7-8.

The top three finalists will pitch their business plans to a virtual audience and expert judges on June 7. In addition to winning $10,000 to support their innovation, the winner will also be invited to present atthe THRIVE Centerin Louisville, Ky., and will have the opportunity to present and exhibit at the next CABHISummit in 2023.

The 2020 Business Plan Competition winner, Steve Xu, CEO and Founder of Sonica said, "Thiscompetition was a huge and motivating event for us since we are a small company working onadvanced technology that doesn't always get recognized. It was valuable for my team to get this recognition from an outside perspective from all these judges who are all-stars. To us it is not about the prize money, it is about the recognition and acknowledgment that our company ideas are meaningful and have a purpose."

Judges for the Business Plan Competition include: Abby Levy, Primetime Partners, John Hopper, Ziegler LinkAge Longevity Fund, Christine Brocato, CommonSpirit, Richard Deulofeut, Trust Ventures, Jennifer Stybel, Pivotal Ventures, Rick Robinson, AgeTech Collaborative from AARP.

MFA is accepting applications through May 6 for this year's What's Next Longevity Venture Business Plan Competition. Learn more and apply online here:www.boomerventuresummit.com.

The What's Next Longevity Venture Summit event sponsors include: AgeTech Collaborative from AARP, GetSetUp, Ageless Innovation, iN2L, CareLinx, Posit Science, Home Instead, Ziegler LinkAge, LifeBio, WAHVE, CDW, Nationwide and Sodexo.

Media Contact:Maysen Folsom805-405-3370[emailprotected]

SOURCE Mary Furlong and Associates

Read more from the original source:

Call for Entrepreneurs in the Longevity Market to Showcase Their Innovative Solutions Before Top Investors and Other Thought Leaders for a Chance to...

Annibale Siconolfi To Posterity

The Decentral Art Pavilion, in parallel with the Venice Art Biennale, opens its doors on April 23rd, 2022 at Palazzo Giustinian Lolin. Curated and organized by Florencia S.M. Brck, Javier Krasuk, Diego Lijtmaer and Simone Furian, with installation design by David Rodrguez Gimeno, and the photography section curated by Arianna Grava, the exhibition entitled Singularity will feature works by Coldie, Aaron Penne, Justin Aversano, XCOPY, Raphael Lacoste, Trevor Jones, Michael Yamashita, Annibale Siconolfi, Filip Custic, Matt Des Laurier, as well as over 200 NFT works of art created by 80+ leading international artists shaping the NFT space.

Singularity is a deep-dive into decentralized art, aiming to educate, engage and enthral the aficionado, the collector, and the public at large; in such a fast-evolving creative dominion it is crucial to foster a dialogue around NFTs and their impact on mainstream art, in order to develop a wider public understanding and appreciation of decentralized technologies. This engaging and lucid exhibition is the first anthological presentation of world-acclaimed NFT artworks, casting light on the spectacular culture around the NFT community while fostering artistic experiences that determine the social significance of digitization for future generations.

For the first time in history, the blockchain evolves beyond its foundations in niche tech communities, NFTs are transcending industries and transforming economies: the Decentral Art Pavilion is an international event that focuses on the artists, companies and individuals using Non-Fungible Tokens to advance the adoption of blockchain in the art world.

We are experiencing an unprecedented artistic evolution where contemporary artexpands in the blink of an eye. This expansion requires a dialogue with traditional mechanisms so that all digital oranalog artistic variants can coexist in a future where the blockchain will be part of our daily lives.

Thanks to the enthusiastic support of key stakeholders in the NFT and blockchain world such as SuperRare, ArtBlocks, Dolce & Gabbana, Blue Swan and Over the Reality, the exhibition will be a unique opportunity for art and NFT technology to meet, and an unmissable chance to enjoy and understand the very best of NFT art, within the splendid setting of the Venetian palazzo.

A particular section of the Decentral Art Pavilion space, entitled 0.14, is curated by Robert Alice and proposes to retrace the early history of the movement that has shaken the contemporary art world. Displaying some of the most significant early works viewers are invited to discover and understand the historical lineage of NFTs, the pioneers that brought them into being, and the different sub-genres that have emerged out of these early works at the very genesis of this field.

The exhibition and its activities will also be virtually accessible at the Decentral Art Pavilion Metaverse. The Over The Reality partnership allows Decentral Art Pavilion to create an Augmented Reality (AR) event. Participants using the Over The Reality mobile platforms will be able to see the NFTs overlaid all around Venice. The Decentral Art Pavilion will encourage the dialogue around NFTs and their impact on mainstream art, in order to develop a wider public understanding and appreciation of decentralized technologies

Mark Westall

Mark Westall is the Founder and Editor of FAD magazine Founder and co-publisher of Art of Conversation and founder of the platform @worldoffad

20th Painting Action is Hermann Nitschs (b.1938, d. 2022, Vienna) final major exhibition presented by Helmut Essls private collection in collaboration with Galerie Kandlhofer,.

Korean artistChun Kwang Young comes to Venice with a solo show at Palazzo Contarini Polignac. Times Reimagined, an Official Collateral []

The NFT (non-fungible tokens) series: Universe Paco Rabanne & Fondation Vasarely launches on Tuesday 12th April in collaboration with Selfridges.

This April Philip Colbert will release his most advanced community project to date, Lobstars, a new collection of 7777 lobster []

Read more:

Decentral Art Pavilion Singularity aims to decode NFTs & the future of art during the Venice Art Biennale. - FAD magazine

It is a pleasure to report that the Singularity Future Technology Ltd. (NASDAQ:SGLY) is up 39% in the last quarter. But don't envy holders -- looking back over 5 years the returns have been really bad. In that time the share price has delivered a rude shock to holders, who find themselves down 57% after a long stretch. So we're hesitant to put much weight behind the short term increase. However, in the best case scenario (far from fait accompli), this improved performance might be sustained.

Since Singularity Future Technology has shed US$136m from its value in the past 7 days, let's see if the longer term decline has been driven by the business' economics.

See our latest analysis for Singularity Future Technology

Given that Singularity Future Technology didn't make a profit in the last twelve months, we'll focus on revenue growth to form a quick view of its business development. Shareholders of unprofitable companies usually expect strong revenue growth. As you can imagine, fast revenue growth, when maintained, often leads to fast profit growth.

In the last five years Singularity Future Technology saw its revenue shrink by 13% per year. That's definitely a weaker result than most pre-profit companies report. It seems appropriate, then, that the share price slid about 9% annually during that time. It's fair to say most investors don't like to invest in loss making companies with falling revenue. You'd want to research this company pretty thoroughly before buying, it looks a bit too risky for us.

The image below shows how earnings and revenue have tracked over time (if you click on the image you can see greater detail).

This free interactive report on Singularity Future Technology's balance sheet strength is a great place to start, if you want to investigate the stock further.

It's good to see that Singularity Future Technology has rewarded shareholders with a total shareholder return of 30% in the last twelve months. There's no doubt those recent returns are much better than the TSR loss of 9% per year over five years. The long term loss makes us cautious, but the short term TSR gain certainly hints at a brighter future. I find it very interesting to look at share price over the long term as a proxy for business performance. But to truly gain insight, we need to consider other information, too. To that end, you should learn about the 4 warning signs we've spotted with Singularity Future Technology (including 2 which are a bit concerning) .

For those who like to find winning investments this free list of growing companies with recent insider purchasing, could be just the ticket.

Please note, the market returns quoted in this article reflect the market weighted average returns of stocks that currently trade on US exchanges.

Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.

This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.

More:

Shareholders in Singularity Future Technology (NASDAQ:SGLY) have lost 57%, as stock drops 49% this past week - Simply Wall St

As AI and robotics continue to advance, there are concerns that machines could soon replace humans in a wide range of occupations. Now theres a new way to tell how likely your job is to be taken over by robots or AI, and what job to shift to if you are at risk.

Industrial robots have been a fixture on manufacturing lines for decades, but they have generally been dumb and dangerous, incapable of operating outside of highly controlled environments and liable to injure human workers unless safely caged.

Advances in AI are starting to change that though, with more nimble and aware robots starting to move from factories and warehouses into storefronts and restaurants. Social distancing requirements due to the Covid-19 pandemic have only accelerated this trend, fueling anxiety that an increasing number of human workers may end up getting displaced by robots.

There have been plenty of studies aimed at predicting which jobs are most at risk from AI and robotics, but now Swiss researchers have gone a step further. In addition to ranking the jobs most at risk of automation, they have also devised a method for at-risk workers to identify jobs less likely to be automated that are already a good fit for their existing skills.

The key challenge for society today is how to become resilient against automation, study co-lead Rafael Lalive, from the University of Lausanne, said in a press release. Our work provides detailed career advice for workers who face high risks of automation, which allows them to take on more secure jobs while re-using many of the skills acquired on the old job.

Workers losing out to automation is not a new phenomenon. As the researchers note in a paper published in Science Robotics, the mechanization of agriculture and automation of manufacturing led to significant changes in the structure of the workforce. But they point out that this time around, these changes may be far more disruptive.

While previous waves of automation primarily affected low-skill jobs, the rapidly improving capabilities of machines mean that medium and high-skill occupations are increasingly at risk. The pace of progress also means that jobs may change far faster than before, opening up the prospect that workers will have to retrain and acquire new skills multiple times throughout their lifetimes.

To identify those jobs most at risk of being replaced by robots, the team first created a list of robotic abilities borrowed from the European H2020 Robotics Multi-Annual Roadmap, which is produced by a collaboration between the European Union and the robotics industry. They then scoured research papers, patents, and descriptions of commercially available robots to determine how mature each of the robotic abilities were.

These were then matched up to human capabilities outlined in the Occupational Information Network (O*NET) dataset, which includes details on nearly 1,000 job profiles. By assessing how many of the skills required to do a particular job can be done by a robot, or could be in the distant future, the team could work out what occupations are most at risk of automation.

This was used to rank the roughly 1,000 jobs in O*NET, with manual jobs like meatpacker most at risk and cognitively demanding ones like physicist safe for the foreseeable future. Unlike previous research though, the team then developed a way to work out what the smartest job transitions would be for at-risk workers.

By computing the similarity of the requirements in two jobs, the researchers were able to come up with a measure of how much effort it would take for workers to retrain. They then combined this with each jobs risk of automation to identify the easiest job for a worker to shift to without the danger that the new occupation will also soon become redundant.

The researchers say the method could help governments tailor their retraining policies and could also help at-risk workers make smarter choices about career changes. Theyve even created a website where people can check whether their job is in danger and what might be the best alternatives for them.

Writing in an accompanying commentary, Andrea Gentili from the University of International Studies in Rome points out that the job description data used by the researchers is limited and the comparison of human and robotic abilities is still somewhat coarse. Nonetheless, he says, the approach they have taken is an innovative contribution that could go a long way to help workers transition to jobs less at risk of automation.

Image Credit: mohamed_hassan / 5741 images

Link:

There's Now an Algorithm to Help Workers Avoid Losing Their Jobs to an Algorithm - Singularity Hub

Does time exist? The answer to this question may seem obvious: of course it does! Just look at a calendar or a clock.

But developments in physics suggest the non-existence of time is an open possibility, and one that we should take seriously. How can that be, and what would it mean? Itll take a little while to explain, but dont worry: even if time doesnt exist, our lives will go on as usual.

Physics is in crisis. For the past century or so, we have explained the universe with two wildly successful physical theories: general relativity and quantum mechanics.

Quantum mechanics describes how things work in the incredibly tiny world of particles and particle interactions. General relativity describes the big picture of gravity and how objects move.

Both theories work extremely well in their own right, but the two are thought to conflict with one another. Though the exact nature of the conflict is controversial, scientists generally agree both theories need to be replaced with a new, more general theory.

Physicists want to produce a theory of quantum gravity that replaces general relativity and quantum mechanics, while capturing the extraordinary success of both. Such a theory would explain how gravitys big picture works at the miniature scale of particles.

It turns out that producing a theory of quantum gravity is extraordinarily difficult.

One attempt to overcome the conflict between the two theories is string theory. String theory replaces particles with strings vibrating in as many as 11 dimensions.

However, string theory faces a further difficulty. String theories provide a range of models that describe a universe broadly like our own, and they dont really make any clear predictions that can be tested by experiments to figure out which model is the right one.

In the 1980s and 1990s, many physicists became dissatisfied with string theory and came up with a range of new mathematical approaches to quantum gravity.

One of the most prominent of these is loop quantum gravity, which proposes that the fabric of space and time is made of a network of extremely small discrete chunks, or loops.

One of the remarkable aspects of loop quantum gravity is that it appears to eliminate time entirely. Loop quantum gravity is not alone in abolishing time: a number of other approaches also seem to remove time as a fundamental aspect of reality.

So we know we need a new physical theory to explain the universe, and that this theory might not feature time. Suppose such a theory turns out to be correct. Would it follow that time does not exist? Its complicated, and it depends what we mean by exist.

Theories of physics dont include any tables, chairs, or people, and yet we still accept that tables, chairs, and people exist. Why? Because we assume that such things exist at a higher level than the level described by physics.

We say that tables, for example, emerge from an underlying physics of particles whizzing around the universe.

But while we have a pretty good sense of how a table might be made out of fundamental particles, we have no idea how time might be made out of something more fundamental.

So unless we can come up with a good account of how time emerges, it is not clear we can simply assume time exists.

Time might not exist at any level.

Saying that time does not exist at any level is like saying that there are no tables at all. Trying to get by in a world without tables might be tough, but managing in a world without time seems positively disastrous.

Our entire lives are built around time. We plan for the future, in light of what we know about the past. We hold people morally accountable for their past actions, with an eye to reprimanding them later on.

We believe ourselves to be agents (entities that can do things) in part because we can plan to act in a way that will bring about changes in the future. But whats the point of acting to bring about a change in the future when, in a very real sense, there is no future to act for?Whats the point of punishing someone for a past action, when there is no past and so, apparently, no such action?

The discovery that time does not exist would seem to bring the entire world to a grinding halt. We would have no reason to get out of bed.

There is a way out of the mess. While physics might eliminate time, it seems to leave causation intact: the sense in which one thing can bring about another. Perhaps what physics is telling us, then, is that causation and not time is the basic feature of our universe.

If thats right, then agency can still survive. For it is possible to reconstruct a sense of agency entirely in causal terms.

At least, thats what Kristie Miller, Jonathan Tallant, and I argue in our new book.

We suggest the discovery that time does not exist may have no direct impact on our lives, even while it propels physics into a new era.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Image Credit: LN_Photoart / 1175 images

View original post here:

Time Might Not Exist, Physicists Say; Causation Is the Basic Feature of Our Universe - Singularity Hub