Sports are entering a new era and it could be powered by artificial intelligence. Jeremy Bloom, CEO of the X Games, is placing a bold bet on AI to revolutionize how competitions are judged and scored. From reducing human error to enhancing fairness and accuracy, AI judges could redefine the future of professional sports. But can machines truly replace human judgment on the worlds biggest stages?
Consistent with the general trend of incorporating artificial intelligence into nearly every field, researchers and politicians are increasingly using AI models trained on scientific data to infer answers to scientific questions. But can AI ultimately replace scientists?
The Trump administration signed an executive order on November 24, 2025, that announced the Genesis Mission, an initiative to build and train a series of AI agents on federal scientific datasets to test new hypotheses, automate research workflows, and accelerate scientific breakthroughs.
So far, the accomplishments of these so-called AI scientists have been mixed. On the one hand, AI systems can process vast datasets and detect subtle correlations that humans are unable to detect. On the other hand, their lack of commonsense reasoning can result in unrealistic or irrelevant experimental recommendations.
While AI can assist in tasks that are part of the scientific process, it is still far away from automating scienceand may never be able to. As a philosopher who studies both the history and the conceptual foundations of science, I see several problems with the idea that AI systems can do science without or even better than humans.
AI models can learn only from human scientists
AI models do not learn directly from the real world: They have to be told what the world is like by their human designers. Without human scientists overseeing the construction of the digital world in which the model operatesthat is, the datasets used for training and testing its algorithmsthe breakthroughs that AI facilitates wouldnt be possible.
Consider the AI model AlphaFold. Its developers were awarded the 2024 Nobel Prize in chemistry for the models ability to infer the structure of proteins in human cells. Because so many biological functions depend on proteins, the ability to quickly generate protein structures to test via simulations has the potential to accelerate drug design, trace how diseases develop and advance other areas of biomedical research.
As practical as it may be, however, an AI system like AlphaFold does not provide new knowledge about proteins, diseases, or more effective drugs on its own. It simply makes it possible to analyze existing information more efficiently.
AlphaFold draws upon vast databases of existing protein structures.
As philosopher Emily Sullivan put it, to be successful as scientific tools, AI models must retain a strong empirical link to already established knowledge. That is, the predictions a model makes must be grounded in what researchers already know about the natural world. The strength of this link depends on how much knowledge is already available about a certain subject and on how well the models programmers translate highly technical scientific concepts and logical principles into code.
AlphaFold would not have been successful if it werent for the existing body of human-generated knowledge about protein structures that developers used to train the model. And without human scientists to provide a foundation of theoretical and methodological knowledge, nothing AlphaFold creates would amount to scientific progress.
Science is a uniquely human enterprise
But the role of human scientists in the process of scientific discovery and experimentation goes beyond ensuring that AI models are properly designed and anchored to existing scientific knowledge. In a sense, science as a creative achievement derives its legitimacy from human abilities, values, and ways of living. These, in turn, are grounded in the unique ways in which humans think, feel and act.
Scientific discoveries are more than just theories supported by evidence: They are the product of generations of scientists with a variety of interests and perspectives, working together through a common commitment to their craft and intellectual honesty. Scientific discoveries are never the products of a single visionary genius.
For example, when researchers first proposed the double-helix structure of DNA, there were no empirical tests able to verify this hypothesisit was based on the reasoning skills of highly trained experts. It took nearly a century of technological advancements and several generations of scientists to go from what looked like pure speculation in the late 1800s to a discovery honored by a 1953 Nobel Prize.
Science, in other words, is a distinctly social enterprise, in which ideas get discussed, interpretations are offered, and disagreements are not always overcome. As other philosophers of science have remarked, scientists are more similar to a tribe than passive recipients of scientific information. Researchers do not accumulate scientific knowledge by recording factsthey create scientific knowledge through skilled practice, debate and agreed-upon standards informed by social and political values.
AI is not a scientist
I believe the computing power of AI systems can be used to accelerate scientific progress, but only if done with care.
With the active participation of the scientific community, ambitious projects like the Genesis Mission could prove beneficial for scientists. Well-designed and rigorously trained AI tools would make the more mechanical parts of scientific inquiry smoother and maybe even faster. These tools would compile information about what has been done in the past so that it can more easily inform how to design future experiments, collect measurements and formulate theories.
But if the guiding vision for deploying AI models in science is to replace human scientists or to fully automate the scientific process, I believe the project would only turn science into a caricature of itself. The very existence of science as a source of authoritative knowledge about the natural world fundaentally depends on human life: shared goals, experiences, and aspirations.
Alessandra Buccella is an assistant professor of philosophy at the University at Albany, State University of New York.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
If one of your New Years resolutions was to spend less time on devices and get more “cultured,” the Metropolitan Opera is here to helpeven if you dont find yourself in New York City.
On Saturday, January 24, 2026, at 1 p.m. ET in select theaters, it will premiere a special “Live in HD” presentation of its recent production, The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay.
Lets take a look at the plot and the artists involved, before we get into more details on the logistics of how to see it.
What is ‘The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay’ about?
Although this work is considered a modern opera, the action in The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay takes place during World War II. Two Jewish cousins work together to create an anti-fascist superhero, the “Escapist.” They hope the comic book adventures they write inspire others to fight against Nazism.
The three distinct settings where the plot unfolds allow the audience to experience New York City, Prague, and a comic book reality.
Who wrote ‘The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay’?
The opera The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay is based on a book of the same name, written by Michael Chabon. This critically acclaimed historical fiction novel was a New York Times bestseller and a 2001 Pulitzer Prize winner. That means if you made a reading goal for 2026, seeing this opera almost counts toward it.
Adapting it for the stage was no easy feat, but Gene Scheer tackled the libretto while Mason Bates composed the score. It is not your grandmas opera, as one of the genres Bates works in is electronic dance music.
Bartlett Sher helmed the production, with sets designed by 59 Studio. The costumes were designed by Jennifer Moeller and choreography was created by Mandy Moore.
[Photo: Evan Zimmerman/Met Opera]
What did critics think of ‘The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay’?
The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clays original run took place from September 21 through October 11, 2025. The performance that will be presented on January 24 was actually recorded on October 2, 2025.
The opera received mostly positive reviews from critics, who praised the strong set design, visuals, and performances. However, some reviewers believed the libretto and compositions were lacking in depth.
TheatreManias David Gordon mused: Kavalier & Clay feels unlike anything Ive ever seen at this storied old palace. Cinematic in scope, fast paced in its delivery, and propelled by a digestibility that you dont often get in the world of opera, its a perfect introduction for new audiences who are looking to test the waters of opera or want an interesting date night.
Opera Wires David Salazar called the production Shers finest opera production to date. He goes on to say that the use of new technology has never been more polished or enticing in any opera the Met has produced thus far.
[Photo: Evan Zimmerman/Met Opera]
Some other critics were not afraid to give notes, such as Edward Sava-Segal from Bachtrack. To him, it was a production of extraordinary visual invention strapped to a score that seldom ventures beyond the predictable. As an event it impresses; as a new cornerstone for the repertory, it falls short. In other words, he enjoyed the production but not the new work itself.
Vultures Justin Davidson agreed with Sava-Segal’s statement. Additionally, he praised mezzo-soprano Sun-Ly Pierces work as Rosa and baritone Andrzej Filoñczyks turn as Joe Kavalier.
How to catch ‘The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay’ in theaters
To form your own opinion on the production, all you have to do is buy a ticket and enjoy the show.
The Met has created a handy “find a theater” tool here, available on its website, to see where this event is happening.
We hear a lot about self-discipline in todays productivity-obsessed culture. And the message is usually that its the cure for economic insecurity and a pathway to self-actualization. At first glance, this appears to make sense. But it can be a double-edged sword in our modern work lives and always-on culture.
Self-discipline enables focus and is key to achievement. However, over-indexing on it can easily erode our own values and boundaries. In turn, this can cause burnout, isolation, and existential despair.
What does discipline really mean?
Discipline has historically been associated with punishment and religious correction. Think physical punishment, including self-flagellation. I grew up at a time when well-meaning parents dispensed discipline, thinking thats what it would take to raise virtuous children. The payoff that came with being praised for hard work at school and excelling in sports meant discipline became a core aspect of my early self-identity.
Contemporary examples of personal discipline tap into the human capacity to regulate impulses and persist toward long-term goals. We see many influencers create vast content parading their self-discipline, whether thats adhering to a complex, three-hour morning routine, or proselytizing an extremely restrictive diet. As a result, self-discipline has taken on a moralistic, “holier-than-thou” tone, with the inference being that doing anything less means you are weak, lazy, and unworthy.
The overt benefits of discipline at work
Amid extreme uncertainty, self-discipline can serve as a powerful protective asset. Longitudinal research on self-control shows that those who can delay gratification and regulate impulses tend to achieve better educational outcomes, higher income, and improved health indicators.
Another research paper suggests that self-discipline can reduce procrastination by boosting autonomous motivation rather than relying on willpower. When people experience their discipline as self-chosen and values-aligned, they report greater feelings of competence and autonomy. In the current work landscape, disciplined routines can help us create a sense of control and continuity amid relentless structural volatility.
When discipline becomes addictive and isolating
However, the same traits that fuel achievement can become compulsive and harmful. Eventually, excessive discipline can lead to ego depletion, where subsequent acts of self-control become harder and more draining. In cultures that moralize productivity, this depletion can be misconstrued as personal failure. As a result, many end up doubling down on discipline rather than questioning the demands theyve been subjected to.
This was my experience as a corporate finance lawyer. At first, the self-discipline Id learned early in life translated perfectly into the “magic circle” law firm culture. Eventually, the constant, intense workload wore me down. Finally, I collapsed at an airport in a state of exhaustion and emotional despair. As uncomfortable as this was, it also gave rise to deep relief: I no longer had to punish myself.
Discipline can become addictive when it produces rewards, but eventually, discipline can become an identity in itself. You might start holding beliefs like having needs is weak, I need to override my bodily urge to rest, or if I falter, I am a failure.
This can lead to anxiety around rest, spontaneity, or deviation from a meticulous schedule. Proponents may begin to choose habits and work patterns that reinforce their disciplined self-image. They stay at the desk until deep in the night, or fasting for an extra day just to prove they can, even when these conflict with relational needs, leisure, or health.
This kind of self-discipline can foster isolation in three ways:
Time-intensive routines (early mornings, extended work hours, strict fitness or side-hustle regimes) crowd out social life and community participation.
They avoid relationships or spaces that “threaten” routine, and they end up narrowing social worlds to similarly disciplined peers, or online productivity subcultures.
They believe that we have sole responsibility for our station in life, rather than seeing the broader, systemic issues. This can cause us to internalize blame, which leads to shame, loneliness, and low self-worth.
Discipline as a modern-day comfort blanket
The definition of our current moment is a paradox: intensified individual responsibility amid abject structural insecurity. Theres an expectation for us to optimize every facet of our lives: our skills, our bodies, and our relationships.
This has two major implications. First, we engage the language of discipline to obscure the structural causes of success and failure. We see unemployment, underemployment, and burnout as deficits of willpower rather than outcomes of policy, corporate practice, or macroeconomic conditions. Second, self-care industries, while at times genuinely beneficial, individualize the management of systemic stress. As a result, this capitalizes on widespread alienation to the detriment of most for the benefit of a few.
We see this dynamic play out for knowledge workers and founders in particular. Hustle culture normalizes permanent availability, constant upskilling, and the erosion of boundaries between work and non-work, all in the name of disciplined ambition. The result is another paradox: The very discipline that enables career advancement may also entrench the conditionsoverwork, anxiety, weakened social tiesthat undermine our long-term wellbeing and creativity.
Toward a more humane discipline
Tempting as it feels to jettison self-discipline altogether, we have a powerful opportunity to reclaim the term. A more humane approach would treat discipline less as an austerity project and more as a tool for protecting your time, energy, and attention for what genuinely matters to you. A good name for this term is mindful self-discipline.
Practically, adopting mindful self-discipline means taking a few steps:
Self-Knowledge: Get really clear on who you are and what matters to you. Not to your parents, peers, society, colleagues, or rndom influencers. For many, this requires peeling back the layers of values and ideas weve taken on, often subconsciously, and identifying our own core values, needs, and priorities.
Self-Awareness: Use discernment to employ disciplined behavior around boundaries, rather than endless productivity. Limit work hours, design your downtime as nonnegotiable, and actively resist the pressure to optimize every waking moment.
Self-Compassion: Ensure that your motivation for pursuing your work, hobbies, and other activities in life doesnt come from the belief that youre lazy, unworthy, or weak. Foster strong self-beliefs around your own intrinsic value as a human being to protect yourself from any harmful self-discipline narrative.
Mindful self-discipline can be used as a strategic resource to carve out autonomy and dignity. The task for all of us is to ensure that human discipline serves our individual and collective flourishingrather than diminishing the very same.
Most factories still run on fossil fuels, whether theyre making potato chips or steel. But a new “thermal battery” could make it cheaper to do the same work with clean energy.
Electrified Thermal Solutions, a startup spun out from MIT research in 2021, just fired up a demo battery that can hit 1,800degrees Celsiushot enough to make steel, cement, or chemicals. The battery uses power from the grid to heat its custom bricks when electricity is cheap. When a factory needs hot air later, it’s provided by the superheated bricks.
[Photo: Electrified Thermal]
Its also cheaper to use than natural gas, so factories dont need a climate goal to be convinced to make the switch.
[Image: Electrified Thermal]
“This is a cheaper approach to heat that today isn’t being taken advantage of, says Daniel Stack, cofounder and CEO of Electrified Thermal Solutions. Electricity is already a cheaper heat source than natural gas, but in the past factories haven’t been able to feasibly use it with their equipment.
Some other startups are making similar thermal batteries, but cant reach the highest temperatures needed by certain industries. Electrified Thermals tech, called the Joule Hive Thermal Battery, uses a unique conductive brick that electricity can flow straight through, enabling ultra-high temperatures.
[Photo: Electrified Thermal]
Backers include ArcelorMittal, the worlds largest steelmaker, which could eventually use the technology to heat up equipment like blast furnaces.
The savings for industrial customers could be substantial. We can charge up with the cheapest electricity during hours of low prices, and this can save you 15%, 20%, 30% on your heating bill, Stack says. These commodity industries live and die by the price they pay for their heating inputs.
Both in the U.S. and Europe, wholesale electricity prices drop close to zeroor even negative pricesat certain times when renewable energy is abundant. The startup is focused first on Europe, where policy makes it easier to access that cheap electricity. (Even as electricity demand grows from data centers, Stack says that there will still be plenty of surplus electricity available at particular hours at a lower price.)
[Photo: Electrified Thermal]
The tech is designed to be easily added to existing factories, with pipes connecting hot air from the batteries into existing kilns, boilers, or furnaces. Customers have the option to pay for heat as a service or buy the batteries directly.
The new demonstration system, at the Southwest Research Institute in San Antonio, will let potential customers see the equipment in action. Commercial units will begin rolling out to some customers later this year.
The batteries can easily scale up, Stack says, and are made from off-the-shelf materials. The bricks are similar to those used in glassmaking, and a large manufacturer, HWI, is beginning to mass manufacture them.
If industry at large makes the switch, the climate benefits would be huge. By one estimate, industrial process heat uses around 20% of the world’s energy. “We’re talking about massive emissions reductionsto the tune of several gigatons per year of CO2reduced through this transition,” Stack says.
The announcement earlier this week that the Minnesota National Guard was standing by to assist local law enforcement and public safety agencies in and around Minneapolis-St. Paul included a surprising detail. If our members are activated, it read, they will be wearing reflective vests to help distinguish them from other agencies in similar uniforms.
From a design perspective, the whole point of uniforms is to provide an instant visual signal. But that mission has been thwarted in the ongoing besiegement of the Twin Cities by thousands of officers from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Customs and Border Protection, and other federal agencies. Most notably, many sport camouflage and gear that civilians tend to associate with the military. The upshot is that its become harder for the average person to understand at a glance who is there to do what.
A Minnesota Army National Guard Captain walks past demonstrators in Minneapolis, Minnesota. January 17, 2026. [Photo: Roberto Schmidt/AFP/Getty Images]
Certainly the presence of uniformed members of multiple agencies seems out of hand when the National Guard has to start wearing crossing guard vests to distinguish themselves. The situation would be comical if it werent so bleak, as if its apparently become necessary for members of the U.S. military to visually announce, hey were here to help, not an occupying army or a threat.
In a way, this throws into sharp relief how effective the ICE aesthetic has been in projecting a quasi-militaristic version of federal law enforcement. The agencys look has been attracting attention for months as it has pursued undocumented immigrants (or just people it suspects might be) in crackdowns in Chicago, New Orleans, Minneapolis, and elsewhere, often showing up at work sites or public spaces in what resembles military tactical gear, body armor, weapons, and masks.
As a GQ assessment of the ICE look pointed out, the agency does not have a single mandatory uniform, just a set of guidelines that give agents latitude to mix street clothes with military-pattern gear, fitted with patches or plate carriers labeled ICE. Most notoriously, many choose to wear gaiter-style masks, to protect their identity and avoid being doxed or otherwise retaliated against. To critics, the upshot of this aesthetic is a lack of transparency and a sense of intimidation: Intentionally or not, the look signals a disruptive, occupying force. You’ve got cops geared up like they’re ready to go fight in Fallujah, one Redditor commented, in order to arrest some cooks and landscapers.
At the very least, the overlapping uniform styles can be a source of confusion. If military veterans have to look very hard at images and footage to figure out individual affiliations, then the average citizen is going to easily confuse what they see as a militarized response rather than a law enforcement one, retired Marine Col. David Lapan, a former spokesman for the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Department of Homeland Security, told military news site Task & Purpose. Worst case scenario, Lapan added: It creates the perception that the U.S. military is being used to suppress the American people.
Minnesota Army National Guard soldiers in Minneapolis, Minnesota. January 17, 2026. [Photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images]
So far the Guard has not been deployed to city streets in Minneapolis; in a press statement, the Minnesota National Guard said they remain on alert could be called on for traffic support to protect life, preserve property, and support the rights of all Minnesotans to assemble peacefully.
Underlying the potential visual confusion is the question of whether camouflage serves any particular function for federal agents operating on city streets in the first place. Retired Army Lt. Gen. Russel Honoré, best known for his blunt-talking style while overseeing the National Guard deployment to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, pointed out to Task & Purpose: Theres nothing that a camouflage uniform can do for you in an urban operation other than [to] portray a sense of authority. His suggestion to non-military agencies currently using camo: Go get your own goddamned uniforms.
If youre a typical American, you get home from work and start flipping switches and turning knobsdoing laundry, cooking dinner, watching TV. With so many other folks doing the same, the strain on the electrical grid in residential areas is highest at this time. That demand will only grow as the world moves away from fossil fuels, with more people buying induction stoves, heat pumps, and electric vehicles.
Thats a challenge for utilities, which are already managing creaky grids across the United States, all while trying to meet a growing demand for power. So theyre now trying to turn EVs from a burden into a boon. More and more models, for instance, feature vehicle-to-grid, or V2G, capabilities, meaning they can send power to the grid as needed. Others are experimenting with whats called active managed charging, in which algorithms stagger when EVs charge, instead of them all drawing energy as soon as their owners plug in. The idea is for some people to charge later, but still have a full battery when they leave for work in the morning.
A new report from the Brattle Group, an economic and energy consultancy, done for EnergyHub, which develops such technology, has used real-world data from EV owners in Washington state to demonstrate the potential of this approach, both for utilities and drivers. They found that an active managed charging program saves up to $400 per EV each year, and the vehicles were still always fully charged in the morning. Utilities, too, seem to benefit, as the redistributed demand results in less of a spike in the early evening. That, in turn, would mean that a utility can delay costly upgradeswhich they need in order to accommodate increased electrificationsaving ratepayers money.
Active managed charging works in conjunction with something called time of use, in which a utility charges different rates depending on the time of day. Between 4 and 9 p.m., when demand is high, rates are also high. But after 9 p.m., they fall. EV owners who wait until later in the evening to charge pay less for the same electricity.
Time-of-use pricing discourages energy use when demand is highest, lightening the load and reducing how much electricity utilities need to generate. But theres nothing stopping everyone from plugging in as soon as cheaper rates kick in at 9 p.m. As EV adoption grows, that coordination problem can create a new spike in demand. An EV can be on its own twice the peak load of a typical home, said Akhilesh Ramakrishnan, managing energy associate at the Brattle Group. You get to the point where they start needing to be managed differently.
Thats where active managed charging comes in. Using an app, an EV owner indicates when they need their car to be charged, and how much charge their battery needs for the day. (The app also learns over time to predict when a vehicle will unplug.) When they get home at 6 p.m., the owner can plug in, but the car wont begin to charge. Instead, the system waits until some point in the night to turn on the juice, leaving enough time to fully charge the vehicle by the indicated hour. If customers dont believe that were going to get them there, then theyre not going to allow us to control their vehicle effectively, said Freddie Hall, a data scientist at EnergyHub.
The typical driver only goes 30 miles in a day, Hall added, requiring about two hours of charging each night. By actively managing many cars across neighborhoods, the system can more evenly distribute demand throughout the night: Folks will leave for work earlier or later than their neighbors, vehicles with bigger batteries will need more time to charge, and some will be almost empty while others may need to top up.
Theyre all still getting the lower prices with time-of-use rates, but theyre not taxing the grid by all charging at 9 p.m. The results are actually very, very promising in terms of reducing the peak loads, said Jan Kleissl, director of the Center for Energy Research at the University of California, San Diego, who wasnt involved in the report. It shows big potential for reducing costs of EV charging in general.
Active managed charging would allow the grid to accommodate twice the number of EVs before a utility has to start upgrading the system to handle the added load, according to the report. (And consider all the additional demand for energy from things like data centers.) Those costs inevitably get passed down to all ratepayers. But, the report notes, active managed charging could delay those upgrades by up to a decade. As EVs grow, if you dont implement these solutions, theres going to be a lot more upgrades, and thats going to lead to rate impacts for everyone, Ramakrishnan said.
At the same time, EVs could help reduce those rates in the long term, thanks to V2G, a separate emerging technology. It allows a utility to call on EVs sitting in garages as a vast network of backup power. So when demand surges, those vehicles can send power to the grid for others to use, or just power the house theyre sitting in, essentially removing the structure from the grid and lowering demand. (And think of all the fleets of electric vehicles, like school buses, with huge batteries to use as additional power.) With all that backup energy, utilities might not need to build as many costly battery facilities of their own, projects that ratepayers wouldnt need to foot the bill for.
Active managed charging and V2G could work in concert, with some batteries draining at 6 p.m. as they provide energy, then recharging later at night. But that ballet will require more large-scale experimentation. How are we going to fit in discharging a battery, as well as charging it overnight? Hall said. Because you do want it available the next day.
To cut greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible, the world needs more EVs. Now its just a matter of making them benefit the grid instead of taxing it.
This article originally appeared in Grist.
Grist is a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Learn more at Grist.org
When I tell fellow tech executives that every employee at sunday, from our engineers to our finance team, must complete a restaurant shift before they can fully onboard, I usually get confused looks. “You mean like, shadow someone?” they ask. No. I mean they tie on an apron, take orders, run food, and yes, deal with the 15-minute wait for the check that our product was literally built to eliminate.
It sounds extreme. It is extreme. And it’s also one of the smartest business decisions we’ve made.
Here’s why: business is often removed from the industries we serve. Were keeping that empathy right there.
The Empathy Gap in Tech
I’ve spent 25 years in the tech world, scaling e-commerce unicorns in Europe before cofounding sunday. I’ve seen brilliant engineers build elegant solutions to problems they’ve never personally experienced. I’ve watched product teams debate restaurant workflows they’ve only seen in wireframes. The result? Products that work in theory but fail in the chaos of a Friday night dinner rush.
Using our industry as an example, the restaurant space cant be disrupted from a distance. It’s intensely human. A server manages six tables, remembers who wanted dressing on the side, tracks which kitchen orders are running late, and still needs to radiate warmth when checking on the anniversary couple at table twelve. When we ask them to adopt new technology, we’re not just changing their workflow, we’re asking them to trust us with their tips, their table turn times, and their relationship with guests.
You can’t design for that kind of stakes without understanding them viscerally.
What a Saturday Night Shift Teaches a Software Engineer
Last month, I watched our newest engineer finish his restaurant shift at one of our partner locations. He was confident going in; he understood our API integrations, he knew our payment flow inside and out. But after five hours on his feet, he had a revelation.
“At the end of my shift, I had to manually enter tips from 22 tables into the POS system,” he told me, exhausted. “Twenty-two times typing in amounts, double-checking I got the numbers right, worrying I’d accidentally shortchange myself or mess up the restaurant’s accounting. The whole time I’m thinking about the train I’m about to miss, and I’m doing math in my head to see if my night was even worth it. It took 15 minutes of my life I’ll never get back.”
This wasn’t theoretical anymore. “I finally understood what we’re actually saving people from,” he told me the next day. “It’s not just 15 minutesit’s the mental load of worrying you made a mistake, the frustration of doing data entry when you’re exhausted, the indignity of technology making your life harder instead of easier. When I use sunday now, I know exactly whose time I’m giving back.”
That’s the point. Empathy at scale isn’t built through user research reports. It’s built through experience.
Hospitality as a Business Philosophy
What started as a practical requirement has become central to how we think about everything at sunday. Hospitality isn’t about being nice. It’s about anticipating needs, moving with urgency, and making people feel valued even under pressure.
Those principles translate directly to how we run our business.
When a restaurant partner calls with an issue, our support team doesn’t respond with ticket numbers and SLAs. They respond like servers handling a complaint: with immediate acknowledgment, genuine concern, and a bias toward solving the problem now rather than escalating it later. Our customer success team knows that “I’ll get back to you tomorrow” is the tech equivalent of “your food will be out in a few minutes”a polite deflection that erodes trust.
We’ve also borrowed the restaurant world’s obsession with the guest experience. In hospitality, there’s no such thing as “that’s not my table.” If a guest needs something, you handle it. We’ve tried to instill that same mentality. When a new market launch hits a snag, our engineers don’t wait for the ops team to flag it. When a sales issue arises, our product managers jump in. We move like a restaurant team during a rushfluid, collaborative, and focused on the experience we’re creating.
The Metrics That Matter
Here’s what surprised me most: this policy has become one of our best retention and recruiting tools.
We’ve had a 94% retention rate among employees who complete the restaurant shift program, compared to 78% at my previous tech companies. Employees consistently rank it as one of their most valuable onboarding experiences.
New hires tell us they appreciate working somewhere that values understanding over assumption. They like that leadership doesn’t just talk about customer obsessionwe quite literally make them walk in our customers’ shoes (and sensible non-slip ones at that).
And when we hire, the restaurant shift requirement self-selects for people with the right mindset. Candidates who balk at the idea of working a shift often aren’t the right fit for our culture anyway. The ones who light up at the challenge? Those are our people.
The tech industry loves to talk about disruption, but we’re often remarkably detached from the industries we claim to understand. We optimize for what we can measure: clicks, conversions, load times. And we miss what we can’t, the relief on a server’s face when they don’t have to chase down a credit card, the gratitude of a mom who can split a check without asking for help, the pride a restaurant owner feels when their team has more time to create memorable moments.
Making our employees work restaurant shifts isn’t a cute culture quirk or a team-building exercise. It’s a business imperative. Every hour our team spends in a restaurant is an investment in building a product that actually solves real problems, not imagined ones.
A Challenge to Tech Leaders
I’d encourage every tech CEO, especially those building B2B products, to ask yourself: When was the last time you personally experienced the problem your product solves? Not observed it. Not read about it in research. Actually lived it?
If the answer is “never” or “it’s been years,” you have a dangerous knowledge gap. Your team is making decisions based on assumptions, building for personas instead of people, and probably missing opportunities that would be obvious to anyone who spent a day in your customers’ reality.
You don’t need to make it a formal policy like we have. But you do need to close the empathy gap between your builders and your users. Shadow a shift. Take customer service calls. Use your competitor’s products. Do whatever it takes to remember that behind every user statistic is a human being trying to do their job, feed their family, or simply have a nice dinner without waiting 15 minutes for the check.
At sunday, we’ve learned that great technology in the hospitality space doesn’t come from brillian engineers alone. It comes from brilliant engineers who’ve burned their hand on a plate, forgotten which table ordered the gluten-free option, and felt genuine panic when the payment system hiccups during a Saturday night rush.
That’s not just good culture. That’s good business.
So, youve finally done it. No more putting it off, pushing through the grind, waiting for a more opportune time once things settle down. Alas, youve mustered up the gall to cash in on your paid vacation time. Now you have several days strung together to travel, rest, or do whatever the heck your heart desires. I love that for you.
But before you slam your work laptop shut and Yabba dabba doo! your ass out of the office, theres one last thing. Youve gotta leave behind a message letting folks know youll be gone. You need to draft an out-of-office message.
Out-of-office notes tend to be pretty standardcourtesy auto-replies letting folks know youre not working, when youll be back, and who, if anyone, they can contact in your stead. Sometimes people add a pop of color hinting at a life outside the office. But these things generally tend to be pretty vanilla.
I, for one, wish corporate peeps got more real with this messaging. Treat these notes like early-stage Facebook status updates: Share what youre really thinking, feeling, and experiencing. This year is already a mess; immigrants continue to be targeted by the federal government, unemployment numbers remain dismal, and it seems like everyones got the flu. Why not keep it 100 for whoever reaches out in the interim?
Longtime readers will remember when I presented a list of pandemic-era openers as alternatives to I hope this email finds you well. Here are some OOO notes I wish I had the heart to schedule. Deploy at your own risk.
I am currently out of office, taking advantage of PTO that is technically unlimited but spiritually frowned upon.
I am currently out of office, taking advantage of PTO that is technically unlimited but managerially frowned upon.
I am currently out of office to recharge after running on vibes, caffeine, and anxiety for six consecutive quarters.
I am out of office avoiding the news for my mental health. Please do not forward any think pieces.
I am currently out of office closing the approximately 637 tabs I have openboth literally and mentally.
I am currently out of office, wearing a quarter-zip sweater and drinking matcha. I hope this auto-reply finds you doing the same.
Im OOO using the gym membership I will abandon by February.
I am currently out of office, ignoring my inbox like its a group chat that is doing the most while Im trying to do the least.
Ill be out of the office while my outie binge-watches Severance and realizes this job feels familiar. Upon my return, the work will continue to be mysterious and important.
I am currently out of office, unpacking last year with a licensed professional.
I am currently out of office, pondering the spiritual meaning of six-seven.
I am currently out of office, updating my résumé just in case.
I am currently out of office, rewatching Sinners so I can feel something again.
I am currently out of office but will absolutely read this message anyway and respond once my brain stops buffering.
I am currently out of office and launching my side hustle. Please subscribe to my Substack.
I am currently out of office, but will be bumping that new A$AP Rocky album until further notice.
Im OOO until my burnout is no longer a personality trait.
I am currently out of office pivoting to my new self. Lets table this and circle back in Q2, when I have the bandwidth to get my ducks in a row.
I am currently out of office, but dont expect a response as soon as I get back. Ill need a few days to remember how to do my job.
I am currently out of office, but unfortunately still mentally available.
We cant afford to maintain the roads we have, so why do we keep building more?
The Highway Trust Fund is the primary federal mechanism for surface transportation. It receives revenue mainly from the federal fuel tax (18.4 cents per gallon on gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon on diesel) plus taxes on tires, heavy vehicles, and some other sources. The fund has two accounts: (1) the Highway Account (road construction, maintenance, and other surface transportation projects), and (2) the much smaller Mass Transit Account.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
Debates about how Americans should pay for roads are endless:
General taxpayer funding, regardless of whether someone drives
Per-mile charges (vehicle miles traveled fees)
Weight-based fees, since heavy trucks and EVs cause disproportionate damage
And the less common full privatization, letting owners/operators set tolls and other forms of charging road users
But the debates often sidestep or ignore any sense of urgency. The fact is there’s a massive and growing funding gap. Under the current setup, we cant afford to maintain whats already been built, let alone pay to build and maintain new construction projects. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) sounds the alarm, even if its in dry, academic language.
Shortfall
Historically, most federal spending for highways has been paid for by revenueslargely from excise taxes on gasoline, diesel, and other motor fuelsthat are credited to the highway account of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). For more than two decades, those revenues have fallen short of federal spending on highways, prompting transfers from the Treasurys general fund to the trust fund to make up the difference.
The CBO projects that balances in both the highway and transit accounts of the HTF will be exhausted in 2028. If the taxes that are currently credited to the trust fund remained in place and if funding for highway and transit programs increased annually at the rate of inflation, the shortfalls accumulated in the HTFs highway and transit accounts from 2024 to 2033 would total $241 billion, according to CBOs May 2023 baseline budget projections.
The HTF is in a state of bankruptcy, but we keep chugging along as if theres no real financial urgency. For more than 20 years, taxpayers have been subsidizing roads because the people who use the roads dont pay enough to cover the costs. The fund has avoided collapse only through repeated bailouts from the U.S. Treasury’s general fund totaling more than $275 billion since the mid-2000s.
Who should pay?
Tapping into the general fund might seem fair if all taxpayers put the same amount of wear and tear on the transportation system, but thats obviously not the case.
About 19% of people ages 20 to 24 dont have a drivers license, and 30% to 40% of people older than 85 dont have a drivers license. Not to mention the wide variety of driving contexts of people who are licensed, the types of vehicles used, and how often they contribute to clogged street networks during rush hours.
The underlying revenue problem has to be fixed, which means the debate has to go deeper, from Who should pay? to How do we make sure revenue covers road expenses?
Systemic problem is an overused term in urbanism, but thats the best way to describe the transportation funding debacle. Cars are more fuel efficient, EVs pay no fuel tax, and other taxes have stayed the same since the early 1990s. Im not even arguing in favor of taxes, Im simply drawing your attention to the obvious problem that there isnt enough money to cover the costs of road maintenance or road expansion.
Basic budgeting
If we treated this issue like a household budget facing chronic overspending, the questions would be straightforward:
How can we reduce expenses?
How can we increase revenue?
Is maintenance more important than new construction?
If we can’t even afford to maintain the current system, how quickly can we halt new spending on expansions?
What alternative mobility options (transit, biking, walking, ridesharing, remote work) can ease the burden using the infrastructure we already have?
This fiscal disaster isn’t abstract policy wonkery, it’s a hard constraint on what the U.S. can realistically build and maintain. Ignoring it risks more patchwork bailouts, more maintenance delays, and eventual service breakdowns. Bottom line, we need to ask better questions and vigorously explore and debate the trade-offs.
{"blockType":"creator-network-promo","data":{"mediaUrl":"","headline":"Urbanism Speakeasy","description":"Join Andy Boenau as he explores ideas that the infrastructure status quo would rather keep quiet. To learn more, visit urbanismspeakeasy.com.","substackDomain":"https:\/\/www.urbanismspeakeasy.com\/","colorTheme":"blue","redirectUrl":""}}
