Anthropic: Anthropic says Fable 5 uses conservative safety classifiers that trigger a fallback to Claude Opus 4.8 in ~5% of sessions, in areas like cybersecurity  —  Today we're launching Claude Fable 5: a Mythos-class1 model that we've made safe for general use.  —  Fable 5's capabilities exceed …

The 2026 Databricks Customer Awards recognize organizations and leaders who are using...

Every industry has its own unique challenges. The Databricks Customer Awards Industry...

Rebecca Bellan / TechCrunch: Anthropic says Fable 5 is available on Pro, Max, Team, and seat-based Enterprise plans through June 22, after which using Fable 5 will require usage credits  —  Anthropic is bringing its most powerful AI model to the general public for the first time, but it's doing it with guardrails.

The self-driving tech company and Apple were rivals before the consumer tech giant got out of the business.

David Gewirtz / ZDNET: Anthropic prices both Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5 at $10 per 1M input and $50 per 1M output tokens, less than half the price of Claude Mythos Preview  —  ZDNET's key takeaways  — Anthropic is releasing Claude Fable 5 for general users.  — Fable 5 uses Mythos-class power with safety controls.

Wired: Anthropic releases Claude Fable 5, a “safe” Mythos-class model it says can't be used for cyberattacks, to the public, and Claude Mythos 5 to trusted orgs  —  Anthropic is releasing Claude Mythos 5 to trusted organizations and Claude Fable 5 to the public, a version it says can't be used for cyberattacks.

The chances are low, but not zero.

Anthropic is releasing Claude Mythos 5 to trusted organizations and Claude Fable 5 to the public, a version it says can’t be used for cyberattacks.

Palantir cofounder Joe Lonsdale said that he knows "what hundreds of companies are doing." Bloomberg/Getty Images Palantir cofounder Joe Lonsdale voiced doubt about CEOs who cited "AI productivity" as the reason for layoffs. Many of these CEOs "over-hired or lowered the bar too much in the 2021-2023 wave," he wrote on X. Companies from Cloudflare to Snap have cited AI in their layoff memos. AI layoffs are everywhere. Palantir cofounder Joe Lonsdale suspects many of them aren't because of AI at all. The layoff memos look quite similar, from Block to Atlassian to Coinbase. They cite productivity gains from AI technology and the need for smaller teams with fewer layers. Lonsdale isn't convinced. "Everyone who over-hired or lowered the bar too much in the 2021-2023 wave, or isn't growing as fast as budgeted, now pretends they're laying people off 'due to AI productivity,'" Lonsdale wrote on X. The post quickly gained traction online, and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen co-signed the message. Khosla Ventures partner Jon Chu also cosigned and called out "Meta and Square as clear examples." Gannon McCollum, a staffer at Elon Musk's xAI, commented that the AI excuse "sounds a lot better than leadership admitting they failed to manage their growth." Lonsdale responded with a bullseye emoji. Dockvine founder Sid Jain called it the "PR machine." Fuse founder Alan Chang asked: "If leaders can't admit their own mistakes, how can they expect employees to admit theirs?" Lonsdale isn't the first to suspect something was amiss in these layoff rationales. In February, Sam Altman said that companies were "AI-washing" their layoffs. "People are blaming AI for layoffs that they would otherwise do," the OpenAI CEO said. Block CEO Jack Dorsey was specifically accused of masking a correction to his over-hiring during the pandemic. He responded that it was true, but that it "misses all the complexity." Lonsdale is a big believer in AI. 8VC, the venture capital firm where Lonsdale is a general partner, is invested in several AI companies. "I believe in higher productivity thanks to AI," Lonsdale wrote in a comment. "I also know what hundreds of companies are doing." Read the original article on Business Insider

I made this 20-minute pasta from Mario Carbone, the chef behind the famous Carbone restaurant. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider Mario Carbone is the chef behind the iconic Italian restaurant Carbone. He gave me the recipe for a penne with spicy shrimp that only takes 20 minutes. The delicious pasta is quick, easy, and packed with flavor. It's perfect for the start of summer. When it comes to Italian spots in New York City, Carbone is easily one of the most famous — and hardest to get into. The restaurant — which also has US locations in Miami, Las Vegas, and Dallas — is famous for its melt-in-your-mouth meatballs, the signature "grandma bread" slicked with tomato sauce, and its spicy rigatoni vodka, which celebrities can't get enough of. While Mario Carbone wouldn't divulge the secrets to his most famous dish, the chef gave me a 20-minute pasta recipe to bring some of Carbone's magic to my own kitchen. Here's how to make it. Mario Carbone's penne with spicy shrimp was inspired by his childhood. World Red Eye This recipe is reminiscent of the southern Italian seafood pastas that Carbone grew up eating with his family in Queens. "What I love about it most is that it's bright, acidic, and clean," he said. "There's no murkiness whatsoever, mainly because the tomato sauce and shrimp don't spend a lot of time together in the pan." The Carbone Fine Food team developed the recipe to pair with its line of pasta sauces. In addition to the arrabbiata, which is used in Carbone's penne with spicy shrimp, you can try the marinara, tomato basil, roasted garlic, and even the spicy vodka. Carbone's penne with spicy shrimp only needs a few ingredients. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider To make the dish at home, you'll need: Shrimp Penne pasta Carbone's arrabbiata sauce Garlic Parsley Chili flakes If you don't have the sauce on hand, Carbone said you can always whip up your own. His pasta sauce is made with Italian tomatoes (whole peeled tomatoes, tomato purée, sea salt, basil), along with onions, olive oil, sea salt, garlic, basil, crushed red pepper flakes, and oregano. To begin, I started my very minimal prep. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider Since I was making pasta for three people, I chopped a handful of parsley and minced three cloves of garlic. Then I peeled and butterflied the shrimp. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider I sliced down the back of each shrimp with a knife, making sure not to cut them in half. Then I used the tip of my blade to remove the dark vein running down the middle. Once my shrimp were ready, I got a pot of salted water boiling. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider To make three servings, I used two-thirds of a 16-ounce box of penne pasta. I placed a sauté pan over medium heat and added some olive oil and the garlic. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider Carbone notes that it's important not to brown the garlic. Simply wait until the oil is infused and aromatic. I added the shrimp as the smell of garlic wafted through my kitchen. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider I seasoned the shrimp with a pinch of salt and plenty of chili flakes — I like a kick! "There's no need to be too delicate with the shrimp," Carbone told me. "You want to cook it somewhat aggressively, almost toasting it." Then I added the arrabbiata sauce and checked on my pasta. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider "This recipe calls for penne, but so many shapes would work well with the sauce — try it with angel hair, for instance," Carbone said. "No matter what, though, make sure it's al dente." Carbone's pro tip: Cook the pasta for one to two minutes less than the package says to ensure you get it perfect. I brought my shrimp and sauce to a simmer, then removed my pan from the heat. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider After sliding the pan to a different burner, I drained my pasta. I added the penne and chopped parsley, tossing everything together. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider The parsley added a nice burst of color to the pan. I couldn't wait to dig in. I sprinkled bread crumbs on top before taking my first bite. The penne was delicious and light. Anneta Konstantinides/Business Insider I was worried the pasta might be a bit plain, but Carbone's recipe packs plenty of heat and flavor. The arrabbiata sauce and chili flakes give each bite a satisfying kick without overwhelming the palate. Even my dad, who hates spicy food, said it was the perfect amount of heat. My mom said it reminded her of "eating spaghetti and fish by the beach in Greece." My Greek family strongly believes that most things taste better with a bit of feta, and it was a great addition to this pasta dish. Even if you can't make it to Santorini this summer, at least you can pretend. Read the original article on Business Insider

Breana Janay Food and lifestyle creator Caroline Chambers has over 568,000 subscribers on Substack. She started her career writing recipes. Then she took the leap into video. Social media — especially Instagram — is fueling her strategy for growing her 7-figure business. Caroline Chambers, Substack's top cooking creator, doesn't have time to be online 24/7. "I'm not a TikToker. I am a mother of four," Chambers, the writer behind the "What To Cook When You Don't Feel Like Cooking" blog, told Business Insider in an interview. Social media, however, is fueling the growth of her Substack. Since launching her newsletter in December 2020, Chambers has accumulated over 568,000 subscribers and is the No. 1 food publication on the platform. "I'm hiring for the first time ever a social media person," Chambers said. Chambers is part of a broader trend of Substackers — and the platform itself — leaning into video and social media. Substack has emphasized new tools for livestreaming, podcasts, and in-app video — and is even providing some funding for new shows. Instagram is the "biggest converter" for paid subscribers, Chambers said. Largely, that's because of the video content she's posted there, which drives new subscribers to her older recipes on Substack. Under the hood, Chambers is using Manychat, a tool that turns comments on an Instagram post into direct messages that can direct people to outside links. There's a free tier for Manychat, though it can cost creators between $17 and $200 a month to unlock all of the startup's tools, including its AI features (Chambers subscribes to the highest tier). Here's how it works. On many of Chambers' cooking videos, she includes a simple direction in the caption: Comment [whatever she's cooking] and I'll send you the recipe! Within seconds, users get a direct message from Caroline's account with a link to her Substack recipe. Immediately, those Instagram views can convert into (ideally paid) Substack subscribers. It's a flywheel that is crucial to Chambers' overall 7-figure business. Like many entrepreneurs in the creator economy, Chambers relies on a mix of several revenue streams to make a living. Subscriptions on Substack are still the biggest slice of the pie, she said, followed by brand partnerships, cookbook sales and contracts, and then affiliate marketing. More video, more business While Substack has bolstered writers' careers with newsletters, video has become increasingly important. Chambers is leaning into this shift by posting video content on Substack and on social media platforms like Instagram. Livestreamed cooking demos, for instance, are a perk for Chambers' top-paying subscription tier. She said doing a joint livestream with another Substacker is also a "growth tool to cross-promote audiences" if both creators send notifications to their subscribers. Chambers spoke on a panel with Substack's Hamish McKenzie at the platform's May summit. Jeremy Cohen; Courtesy of Substack Chambers is getting ready to launch a new, "highly produced" video series this summer. It'll live on both Substack and YouTube, and videos posted to the latter will strategically drive people back to Chambers' Substack. "For instance, YouTube won't have the recipe on it," she said. This mirrors her approach on Instagram. Substack's investment in video is one way to keep people coming back to its content. According to the platform, people who come to Substack via audio or video creators are "50% more likely to subscribe to additional publications." The company also launched a TV app at the start of the year. Substack is helping Chambers cover some of the show's production costs. Substack cofounder Hamish McKenzie recently told Business Insider that the platform would provide "infrastructure" for select creators. "We're not putting the thumbs on the scale in terms of distribution, but we can help certain people like Caroline who really want to do a show," McKenzie said. Read the original article on Business Insider

Federated learning (FL) research often begins with a deceptively simple question: What should we try next? A new aggregation rule, a FedProx coefficient, a... Federated learning (FL) research often begins with a deceptively simple question: What should we try next? A new aggregation rule, a FedProx coefficient, a server optimizer setting, a SCAFFOLD variant, or a model architecture tweak may all look promising before an experiment starts. After the run finishes, the harder questions begin: Did the change actually improve the metric? Source

Meta won't say why or whether it's coming back.

Enterprise Document Intelligence [Vol.1 #4bis] - A coauthor note on the brick-by-brick pitfalls that justified the four-brick split, before Part II walks the fixes The post 10 Common RAG Mistakes We Keep Seeing in Production appeared first on Towards Data Science.

Richard Nixon conducted a secret bombing of Cambodia without Congressional approval in 1970. Bettmann Archive/GettyImages Both houses of Congress have advanced War Powers resolutions in the wake of the war with Iran. Presidents have repeatedly ordered military operations without Congress since WWII. In some instances, lawmakers have checked the president's power in response. This week, the United States' and Israel's war against Iran passed the 100-day mark. In the more than three months since the war began, a host of ethical, economic, and political questions have arisen about the conflict. One of the most pressing political questions has centered on the legality of the war itself. Operation Epic Fury, a large-scale military operation, was launched without congressional authorization, which lawmakers argue is required under the Constitution. On June 3, the House of Representatives passed a War Powers resolution that, if passed by the Senate, would require the removal of all offensive forces within 30 days of its passage, per PBS News. In May, the Senate advanced its own resolution, which hasn't been brought to a final vote. The House resolution will require 60 votes in the Senate in order to be brought to a vote. President Donald Trump would then hold the ability to veto the resolution, which would require a two-thirds vote from both houses to override it. In May, Trump argued that a ceasefire with Iran meant hostilities were "terminated" and therefore congressional approval wasn't necessary. Since Trump's comments, the US has carried out further strikes against Iran, which government officials labeled "self-defense" strikes, PBS News reported. Congress hasn't officially declared war since June 4, 1942, when it declared war on Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania during World War II. Since then, in instances like the Gulf War, the war in Afghanistan, and the Iraq War, Congress has typically approved force via "Authorization for Use of Military Force." While not an official declaration of war, it allows the military to engage in targeted objectives, according to the Library of Congress. Still, there have been plenty of times throughout American history when the president has ordered large-scale military operations without direct Congressional approval, whether through loose interpretations of presidential powers or without providing any legal justification. While this practice has been met with legal challenges at times, in other instances, presidents have avoided scrutiny from Congress due to widespread support for the military action. Andrew Wiest, a professor of military history at the University of Southern Mississippi, said these instances are part of a broader concession of Congressional war powers to the executive branch since WWII. "Since 1946, Congress has relinquished this constitutional authority and granted it to the president, probably much to the founders' chagrin," Wiest said. "The founders were extremely wary of a president with too much military authority." Here are 11 notable examples of US military operations conducted without direct congressional approval. Philippine-American War American soldiers in the Philippines during the Philippine-American War, May 1899. Hulton Archive/Getty Images Even before WWII, certain US military actions were the source of fierce debate. Following the Spanish-American War, the Philippine Islands were ceded to the US in the Treaty of Paris in 1898. Despite the United States' claim to the territory, Filipino revolutionary fighters declared independence and resisted American attempts to acquire the islands. President William McKinley never sought a formal declaration of war or authorization from Congress. Since the Treaty of Paris was newly ratified by Congress, however, McKinley interpreted it as an effective approval of force from lawmakers. The war was controversial in Congress, with anti-imperialists claiming the annexation of the Philippines was illegal, according to the House of Representatives. The war lasted over three years, from 1899 to 1902, and American deaths totaled 4,200. About 20,000 Filipino fighters were killed, while up to 200,000 civilians died of disease, famine, and violence, per the Department of State. Korean War American soldiers in the Korean War. President Truman labeled the effort a "police action." Keystone/Getty Images After the US and Soviet Union divided Korea into two countries following WWII, fighting ensued in 1950 when North Korean forces invaded South Korea. The United Nations Security Council soon directed its member nations to assist South Korea, prompting US involvement. President Harry Truman, however, never sought any form of approval from Congress, instead labeling the US's efforts a "police action" under the auspices of the UN. This framing was refuted by some members of Congress, with Republican Senator Robert Taft claiming the lack of congressional approval was "a complete usurpation by the president of authority to use the armed forces of this country," per the Brennan Center. The war's identity as an international effort overshadowed the lack of congressional approval, according to Wiest. "At the time, the UN was young, robust, and something new," Wiest said. "With a UN resolution to defend South Korea, what more top cover do you need?" The Korean War ultimately lasted three years and resulted in the deaths of 37,000 American soldiers, according to the Department of Defense. As many as 5 million people lost their lives in total from the conflict, many of them civilians. Vietnam War American soldiers of the 173th airborne are evacuated by helicopter from a Vietcong position in December 1965. AFP via Getty Images Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution in August 1964, giving President Lyndon Johnson the authority to use military force in Vietnam and the surrounding countries. But as the war dragged on and opposition at home grew, pressure mounted on the US government, and questions arose about Johnson's continued war powers. Then, two years after Richard Nixon had assumed office, Congress repealed the resolution, meaning no law on the books authorized US military force in Southeast Asia. Though Nixon began reducing the number of deployed US troops when he took office in 1969, bombing campaigns continued until the end of the war. A federal appeals court later declared the war a political issue and did not rule on the legality of Nixon's continued bombing, The New York Times reported. A total of 58,220 Americans died as a result of the war, per the National Archives. Bombing of Cambodia The aftermath of a US B-52 bombing in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Congress later passed the War Powers Resolution of 1973, limiting Nixon's military power. Bettman Archive/GettyImages Nixon also conducted bombing campaigns in Cambodia, which began in 1969 and continued after the repeal of the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. The operation — to disrupt supply routes along the Ho Chi Minh trail and to target suspected communist hubs — began in secret without Congress ever being informed. The bombings prompted Congress' passing of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which aimed to limit the president's power in conducting military operations. Nixon vetoed the legislation, but Congress overrode the veto with a two-thirds majority. The successful war-powers challenge represented a rare moment in modern American history where Congress reclaimed its war powers. Wiest said political factors play a large role in Congress' usual inaction. "Partisanship and politics is part of it," Wiest said. "No congressman can be seen as being against the troops. In my view, there's no more risky electoral thing to do." From 1969 to 1973, the US dropped 540,000 tons of bombs on Cambodia. Estimates for civilians killed as a result of the bombings range from 150,000 to 500,000, per PBS Frontline. 1983 invasion of Grenada US soldiers run across a soccer field during the US invasion of Grenada in October 1983. Bettmann Archive/Getty Images In 1983, a coup in Grenada resulted in the execution of the country's leader, Maurice Bishop. Ostensibly to protect hundreds of medical students in the country and restore order after the government's overthrow, the US invaded the island nation with help from Caribbean allies. The US invasion, ordered by President Ronald Reagan, was carried out without congressional approval. This prompted Congress to apply the War Powers Resolution, forcing withdrawal of US troops within 60 days, The New York Times reported. The campaign only lasted eight days, but it resulted in the death of 19 US soldiers and 24 Grenadian civilians, per Army University Press. 1989 invasion of Panama US soldiers inspect a prison cell in Panama during the 1989 invasion. Steven D Starr/Corbis via Getty Images In what was codenamed Operation Just Cause, the US invaded Panama in 1989 with the intention of overthrowing its leader, Manuel Noriega, who was indicted under US law for drug trafficking. Other reasons cited for the operation were protecting Americans in Panama, defending democracy, and protecting the Panama Canal treaties. The State Department said the actions were also carried out with the consent of Panama's legitimate government, which was sworn in before the invasion. Like Reagan before him, President George H.W. Bush didn't seek congressional approval beforehand. However, the invasion had strong public and congressional support, subduing potential war-powers challenges. The invasion was swift, and Noriega was quickly captured and tried in the US. He was later convicted and sentenced to 40 years in prison, eventually serving 17 years in the US. All in all, 23 US soldiers were killed in the operation, and an internal US Army memo estimated the number of Panamanian deaths at around 1,000, per Politico. 1999 NATO bombing of Yugoslavia A Kosovan civilian in Pec, Yugoslavia walks among rubble in June 1999. Georges MERILLON/Gamma-Rapho via Getty Images During the Kosovo War, NATO forces led by the US initiated a bombing campaign in Yugoslavia against the Yugoslav Army. NATO said the strikes were intended to stop "ethnic cleansing" of Kosovar Albanians by Yugoslav forces and to pressure those forces to leave Kosovo. Though Congress originally voted to send US peacekeeping troops to NATO in March of 1999 before the bombing began, a later House measure authorizing the strikes failed in a tie vote. The continued bombing campaign under President Bill Clinton later prompted a war powers lawsuit filed by 31 members of the House, which was dismissed by a judge on the grounds that "a clear impasse between the executive and legislative branches" was absent, CBS News reported. Much as with the Korean War after WWII, Wiest said, the notion of internationalism following the end of the Cold War provided cover for the operation's legality. "It was a period of early optimism in the wake of a world-changing event, so that optimism, with the top cover of the UN or NATO, just overwhelmed any American constitutional need to declare war," he said. As well as killing over 1,000 Yugoslav combatants, the strikes claimed the lives of roughly 500 civilians, per Human Rights Watch. 2011 US and NATO intervention in Libya A missile being fired from the USS Barry during operation Odyssey Dawn. DDG 52/GettyImages As part of an intervention conducted by NATO forces, US forces participated in strikes on Libya during the Libyan Civil War. In response to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's attacks on civilians, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 1973 on March 17, 2011, which authorized military action in Libya. President Barack Obama never sought congressional approval for the action, leading to criticism from Congress and 10 House members filing a lawsuit in an attempt to block further military action, NPR reported. The legal action was later dismissed by a federal judge, Reggie Walton, who noted that lawmakers already had the legislative means to challenge the military operation in Congress. In light of other pressing political issues, Walton said, "…the Court finds it frustrating to expend time and effort adjudicating the relitigation of settled questions of law." The Obama administration used the UN Security Council resolution as a justification and claimed the operation was limited and thus within the scope of the War Powers Resolution. US strikes in Yemen A Yemeni man walks among the rubble of a destroyed building. AFP/GettyImages The US struck Houthi targets in Yemen after the military group began targeting commercial ships in 2023 in response to Israel's invasion of the Gaza Strip. Both the Biden and Trump administrations conducted strikes against the Houthis without seeking congressional approval. The most recent strikes in 2025, conducted by the Trump administration, killed at least 224 civilians, per the Middle East monitoring group Airwars. Wiest said there's a double standard applied to ground versus air military operations, with the latter offering more war-powers leeway. "The use of air power has almost been a kind of national 'Get Out of Jail Free' card when it comes to opening these types of conflicts," he said. 2025 strikes on Iran nuclear sites B-2 spirit stealth bombers like the one pictured here over Afghanistan were used in Operation Midnight Hammer. USAF/Getty Images In what was codenamed Operation Midnight Hammer, the Trump administration struck Iran's nuclear facilities without Congressional approval. President Trump argued the strike was a necessary measure to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. While the strikes had the broad support of Republican lawmakers, Democrats and Republican Thomas Massie criticized the operation's lack of authorization from Congress, NPR reported. 2026 US raid inside Venezuela Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, and his wife, as they're escorted to court in Manhattan. ADAM GRAY/REUTERS On January 3, the Trump administration conducted surprise strikes on Venezuela that deposed the country's president, Nicolás Maduro. Maduro was captured and brought to the US, where he faces narco-terrorism and other drug charges. The former Venezuelan leader has pleaded not guilty. The Trump administration justified the strikes by calling them "law-enforcement operations" to target what it called Maduro's "narco-terrorist organization." The strikes resulted in about 75 deaths, including two civilians and 32 Cuban special forces, per the Center for Strategic & International Studies. Seven American troops were injured. Critics in Congress questioned the legality of the intervention. While a war powers resolution was brought to the floor for a vote in the Senate, it was blocked by the Republican-led majority. Editor's note: This story was originally published in March 2026. It was most recently updated in June 2026. Read the original article on Business Insider

Marines prepare to fire an FIM-92 Stinger missile during a training exercise. Sgt. Brian Knowles/US Marine Corps Army plans to buy 11,000 next-generation missiles to replace aging Stingers Lockheed Martin and RTX, formerly Raytheon, are competing to build the new shoulder-fired weapon The missile is designed to counter aircraft, helicopters, and larger drones The US Army is preparing for a major overhaul of its short-range air defense arsenal and is seeking 11,000 next-generation missiles to replace its aging Stinger missile. In a request for information document published on the government's contracting website last week, the service said it's looking for defense industry input on production of the Next Generation Short Range Interceptor, or NGSRI, a new surface-to-air missile. The Army, together with industry partners, began developing the weapons in 2023 and hopes to begin producing them in five years. A planning estimate included in the documents posted online calls for the procurement of approximately 11,000 missiles and 2,200 launch assemblies over ten years. Defense industry juggernauts Lockheed Martin and RTX are each competing to be the Army's choice for Stinger replacements. RTX's Raytheon business makes the current Stinger. Each tested potential replacement options earlier this year. Lockheed conducted the first in a series of planned flight tests in January, and in February, RTX's Raytheon carried out a ballistic test. The Army says that the new NGSRI will be a "fire and forget" missile, meaning the shooter doesn't have to guide it after launch, capable of defeating helicopters, fixed-wing aircraft, and larger unmanned aerial systems. It is intended to replace the FIM-92 Stinger, a shoulder-fired missile that has been a cornerstone of American short-range air defense for decades. Like the US military's FGM-148 Javelin and M3 MAAWS Carl-Gustaf systems often used to target vehicles or tanks, the Stinger is small enough to be carried by ground combat personnel and is fired by mounting the weapon on the shooter's shoulder. The Stinger is characterized as a MANPADS, or man-portable air-defense system. It relies on an infrared-homing seeker to engage targets and has been in service since the early 1980s. Though reliable, the modern air defense environment is becoming increasingly complex, demanding more advanced capabilities. The coming NGSRI is expected to be faster, have a longer range, and be more survivable while also being able to engage a wider range of aerial threats. The Army's interest in procuring thousands of NGSRI missiles comes as the US military grapples with growing concern over munitions stockpiles. While fighting in the Middle East has taken a toll on stocks of higher-end air defense systems, significant transfers to Ukraine over the years have depleted the US Stinger arsenal. Those stockpiles aren't easily rebuilt, since the Stinger is an older weapon with a relatively cold industrial base. Rather than reignite production, the Army is instead chasing a replacement. According to the Army's request document, the Stinger replacements should be compatible with existing launch platforms. Read the original article on Business Insider

Discussion | Link

India’s Global Capability Centers are pulling ahead of IT services firms in AI and cloud hiring, as multinationals bring more sensitive, high-value technology work in-house. The post India GCCs Lead AI and Cloud Hiring as IT Services Trail appeared first on TechRepublic.