On Wednesday morning, Puerto Rico Governor Ricardo Rosselló sat beside Airbnb CEO Brian Chesky at one of the company’s swanky buildings in San Francisco. The two were announcing a partnership to bring more tourism to the island, where some residents are still without power and even without homes, following the ravages of Hurricane Maria in September. “One of the best ways to help an economy is to continue to send visitors there,” Chesky said.

Airbnb is just one stop on a whirlwind tour Rosselló is making to some of the most prominent companies in Silicon Valley, as he tries to take advantage of the bittersweet limelight that the Category 4 storm has put on the U.S. territory. Devastation also means a chance to reimagine things as the island rebuilds, and the 39-year-old is casting Puerto Rico as a “blank canvas” for innovators to come and experiment.

The leader of 3.4 million people is also pushing for a bigger investment: statehood. At Airbnb, he criticized what he sees as “two tiers of citizenship” and argued that statehood would super charge the island’s long struggling economy. “We need to ask ourselves, in the 21st century, if we are satisfied with the notion that this standard bearer for democracy has a colonial territory,” Rosselló said. “In our view, that needs to change.”

TIME sat down with the leader of Puerto Rico’s New Progressive Party — who also identifies as a Democrat — after the press conference to talk about how the recovery is going, why he’s courting Big Tech and whether Donald Trump has been a good president for Puerto Ricans.

The following has been edited for brevity and clarity.

Looking back on everything the federal government and Trump have done in the wake of Hurricane Maria, do you give it a 10 out of 10?

As I told the President himself, recoveries are evaluated as time goes along. There have been some things I’ve been very happy with and some things that I haven’t. I’ll give you examples of both. I’ve been very unsatisfied with the Army Corps of Engineers and their effort to rebuild the energy grid. I’ve been unsatisfied with some of the additional bureaucratic steps that have been added for Puerto Rico, particularly on the FEMA side. On other fronts, we’ve been working well with FEMA. I was also very satisfied in the emergency phase with the military’s involvement…. We’re all going to be evaluated on how this ends up.

So not quite a 10 out of 10.

I shy away from giving a number. I don’t tend to give grades. I used to do that when I was a professor. Not anymore.

How are people feeling in terms of getting their lives back together?

In the majority of cases, it’s already reaching normalcy. The school system opened. Businesses are opening. Tourism by June is expected to reach pre-Maria levels but probably even higher. One of the things that was always lagging behind was energy. Today, 98% of clients are being served. But that is the grand scheme of things. There are some places where people don’t have jobs and their homes haven’t been fixed. Even though it is smaller scale, about 22,000 clients still don’t have access to energy and there are some places where 40% of the municipality doesn’t have energy. That is a hard pill to swallow and we’ve been working as quickly as possible to mitigate that.

You mentioned that the profile of Puerto Rico has been raised because of the storm. It seems like a mixed bag as you try to draw tourists. Other regions like Napa saw many people cancel trips after high-profile wildfires, for example.

We didn’t choose the catastrophe, it came to us. Because of that, there’s a level of profile. Compared to Napa, a lot less people knew about Puerto Rico. In fact, polls show that prior to the storm about 25% of American citizens knew that we were American citizens. After all of the media coverage, about 85% know now. We need to use this as an opportunity to showcase Puerto Rico for what it is, what it has, what needs to be changed. Because prior to the storm, we didn’t have the political wherewithal and we didn’t have the bully pulpit. Now we at least have some of the bully pulpit.

Does it surprise you that such low numbers of Americans were aware that Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens?

Puerto Rico is a very delicate issue. It is sort of a geopolitical black hole. In the past, because there were so many issues – the United States has to deal with Russia, Iran – you could sort of put it into a second or third tier. Not a lot of people would fight about it, and we didn’t have the political structure — because we don’t have senators or congressmen — to put that idea out there. Now, after the storm, there is this awareness about Puerto Rico.

Was I surprised? No. We had measured it, and it was always very disappointing. Again, a majority are now aware. The follow up question is: Should they be treated equally? Or should we have this colonial territory system prevail in the 21st century? The way that Congress was designed is that issues are not attended to unless they are highly critical. I think it’s a critical question.

When you met with President Trump, did you speak to him about the statehood issue?

We spoke about it. I speak to everyone about it. He said he wasn’t going to touch upon those issues, that he was going to let the people of Puerto Rico decide. I just take what was in the Republican platform and the Democratic platform. When you read those statements, they’re very clear. On the Republican side, it says they will respect the will of the people of Puerto Rico if they so choose to become a state. What we need is a path forward for that to happen.

You have spoken before about mobilizing Puerto Ricans in the midterms, particularly because of the tax plan [that treats the island like a foreign competitor]. Are you still working on that?

I’m doing that. It’s not about being a Republican or Democrat, but if you are a friend or an opponent to the people of Puerto Rico. We have a platform. We have registration drives in some of the critical states. We can show that we have political force and influence on the national stage. What’s the objective right now? Time is really not our friend, so we’re really focusing on certain areas: Florida, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, some districts in Texas and so forth.

What brings you to Silicon Valley?

My aspiration in this rebuilding process is that Puerto Rico can become a blank canvas for innovation. A lot of funds are going to come to Puerto Rico for the rebuilding, and it presents a unique opportunity to build smarter and get the best innovators in the world to come and showcase what they have to do – in areas of energy, transportation, overall technology infrastructure, the housing side. What we are doing over here is making sure all the stakeholders know that Puerto Rico is not only open for business but has this unique opportunity to showcase models that they might have on paper or a small scale.

If we leverage some of the opportunities – five years, ten years down the road – Puerto Rico could become a destination for the human cloud, as we’re calling it. In the future, it’s going to be even more clear that jobs are geographically independent and people are going to choose wherever they have a better quality of life. We want to make Puerto Rico that spot.

There’s been a lot of talk about tech companies based here working harder to create jobs elsewhere, to make sure other parts of the country aren’t left behind. Do you think they have a civic responsibility to think about other places?

I would say they do. Also on a pragmatic level, it benefits them — if you expand from just one place, adding diversity, adding a different mindset, having different world views, being able to tap into emerging thoughts and technologies from elsewhere. In my view, it can only add value.

As you go to these firms, if you’re trying to pitch Puerto Rico as an alternative to places like Colorado or Texas, what are your biggest challenges and advantages?

The biggest challenges are things like energy costs and reliability and the bureaucratic red tape the government has. I’ve declared war on both of them.… The major benefits are we have unique value propositions on the tax front. We have a highly skilled labor force on the high-end manufacturing side. And just the natural beauty of being in Puerto Rico and having it be a place for people to move, when companies set up base.

Besides the citizenship issue, what do you think people in the States most misunderstand about Puerto Rico?

The fact that it is a colonial territory.

The word colonial is jarring.

It is, but it’s the truth. It was a colonial territory for 400 years with Spain and for 100 years within the United States. What other word can you use for it?

A second thing is that a lot of Puerto Ricans are moving to the States. We’re U.S. citizens, so there are no visas. All we have to do is buy a plane ticket. There are now 5.6 million Puerto Ricans in the United States, which is almost double what we have back home.

Thirdly, the fact that even being a territory, the vast majority of Puerto Ricans are proud U.S. citizens. We serve in the U.S. military at the highest per capita rate in the nation. There are a lot of unknowns.

Do you feel like Trump has been a good president to Puerto Ricans so far?

I can only say what the President has done. He has always responded to our petitions. We got a historic amount of funding for the recovery. So in my capacity as governor, I have to call balls when they’re balls and strikes when they’re strikes, and I have to say he has responded to our petitions.

My concern is that sometimes within the structure of the federal government, those petitions don’t manifest and bureaucracy takes over. Other interests take over. And some of those don’t get fulfilled. But there is time to fix them, and my hope is that the President and folks in the administration will not put up additional obstacles for Puerto Rico, but actually help us achieve these aspirational goals I have defined.

We have a small window of opportunity and whatever we do in the next six months will define the Puerto Rico we have in the next 10 years.

Nothing stands still in orbit. To stop is to die — or at least to come plummeting back to the ground. That’s the nature of the forces that keep spacecraft flying, with their altitude and velocity balanced in just such a way that they fall endlessly and silently around the planet, physics serving as their only fuel.

But orbiting is a far more dynamic, far more violent process than it seems. Spacecraft circling the Earth tear along at an average speed of 17,500 mph (28,160 k/h) — or a cool 5 miles every second. That makes it especially tricky when one ship blazing through its orbital paces tries to meet up and dock with another. To achieve such an astronautic pas de deux, the spacecraft must precisely synchronize their movements, exactly matching their altitudes and speeds so that they appear, relative to each other, to be standing absolutely still. One ship then tweaks its thrusters slightly, adding just a mile or two per hour to the 17,500 it’s already clocking, and closes slowly in. It’s a monstrously hard job with monstrously high stakes — a mistake could mean the catastrophic loss of both spacecraft and crew.

Nonetheless, from the beginning of the Space Race, the U.S. and the old Soviet Union avoided any such crackups mostly by designing their spacecraft guidance systems to within the finest tolerances and training their astronauts and cosmonauts to operate them with equal precision. But what happens when your crews are still first-rate but your spacecraft is a jalopy — like, say, the overgrown, broken-down Mir space station which, by the late 1990s, had long since passed its orbital expiration date? And what happens when you’re trying to bring an uncrewed Progress cargo ship in for a safe docking with the station but you’re using a new maneuvering system that had barely been tested before — and had failed that test the last time it was tried?

Those were questions that should have been asked long before June 25, 1997, when Russian cosmonauts Vasily Tsibliev and Aleksandr Lazutkin and American astronaut Michael Foale tried just such a maneuver 233 miles above the safety of the Earth. The emergency that unfolded in the 24 hours that followed would be the worst near-disaster in space since the Apollo 13 mission 27 years before — and would test the ingenuity of the ground and the cool-headedness of the crews in just the same way.

TIME tells that harrowing story in Episode Eight of the podcast Countdown, “Collision in Space.”

A Burger King in Philadelphia is refusing to serve the chain’s new Philly Cheese King, a Philly cheesesteak-inspired burger out of respect for the “traditional recipe.”

The news was announced, interestingly enough, in a press release by Burger King themselves.

“Despite taste test approvals from Philadelphians, one restaurant in Philadelphia opted out of selling it completely to honor the traditional recipe,” the chain wrote. “So, on October 25, the PHILLY CHEESE KING® will not be sold at the BK® restaurant located at 15 S 8th St, Philadelphia, PA 19106 until otherwise overturned by the BURGER KING® brand.”

The burger features more than a half pound of flame-grilled 100% beef, carmelized onions, and American cheese.

In a statement to Munchies, Burger King doubled down on the respect they have for the OG cheesesteak.

“This restaurant is in the heart of Philly, and decided in order to honor their sacred Philadelphia Cheesesteak, they will not be selling the Philly Cheese King.”

The 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution may have been ratified 150 years ago — on July 9, 1868 — but Monday’s news is clear proof that the amendment is as timely as ever.

With President Donald Trump set to announce on Monday night his nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, one particular case in the court’s history is front-of-mind for advocates on both sides of the aisle: Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision ruling that prohibiting abortions was unconstitutional. Abortion-rights advocates worry that Kennedy’s replacement could increase the chance that Roe would be overturned, and those on the other side of the issue eagerly hope for the fulfillment of Trump’s campaign promise to nominate someone who would do exactly that.

And at the heart of the Roe decision is the 14th Amendment.

In its Due Process clause, the 14th Amendment states, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

As TIME explained shortly after the decision was handed down, Justice Harry A. Blackmun, writing the opinion for the majority, ruled that this clause included an implicit right to privacy for women deciding whether to terminate a pregnancy:

Not everyone agreed that Blackmun’s reasoning made sense. In a dissenting opinion, for example, Justice William H. Rehnquist argued that “a transaction resulting in an operation such as this is not ‘private’ in the ordinary usage of that word.” And some jurists and scholars who are on board with the Roe holding still disagree about whether a right to privacy can really be found in the amendment, or about whether Blackmun properly explained his reasoning.

Even those who disagree with the Roe decision sometimes turn to the 14th Amendment for answers. Some have called for “Congress to legislate that unborn children are persons under the 14th Amendment,” as the National Review sums up that side of the issue; if that were the case, the fetus would also have a right to due process and other protections, though the first part of the amendment does specify that citizens are people “born or naturalized” in the U.S. That argument gained steam in the 1980s, as Roe v. Wade backlash became more of a conservative rallying point. In this period, as historian Daniel K. Williams recently wrote, antiabortion activists began lobbying presidents to pick like-minded jurists for federal courts and abortion-rights supporters responded in kind; Williams cites the 1987 rejection of President Reagan’s Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, who had voiced his opposition to Roe, as a turning point in the conservative effort to lobby for a nominee who would overturn the case.

Roe is far from the only case that involves the relationship between the 14th amendment and privacy rights. But, because of the close ties between the case and the amendment, if the Supreme Court does decide to revisit Roe v. Wade in the future, it could have a ripple effect on the interpretation of the amendment.

Like many laws and parts of the Constitution, the meaning of the 14th Amendment is still being debated 150 years later. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing, argues historian Eric Foner, who wrote on the occasion of the amendment’s anniversary that Americans should “embrace” its “imprecise” language: “Ambiguity,” he wrote, “creates possibilities.”

(Bloomberg) — YouTube said it’s banning comments on some videos featuring minors, responding to criticism and the loss of advertisers after the service was used by potential predators to exploit children.

The Google unit, one of the world’s largest video services, disabled comments from tens of millions of videos “that could be subject to predatory behavior” and will continue to identify similar troubling videos in coming months, the company said Thursday in an unsigned blog post.

“We will be broadening this action to suspend comments on videos featuring young minors and videos featuring older minors that could be at risk of attracting predatory behavior,” YouTube added.

Pulling comments from YouTube is a big step. Video creators use the comments section to communicate with viewers, find new ones and get feedback. It’s also a major part of what makes YouTube social.

“It basically destroys the community,” said Jacob Strickling, who makes online videos about science that run on YouTube. He expects it to have a “massive impact” on those videos’ views as fans find themselves unable to communicate with each other through the comments section. “They will leave YouTube and go to platforms like Facebook where they can continue their commenting and banter.”

YouTube is using an artificial intelligence technique called machine learning to build the software that will automatically select which videos will have comments suspended, a spokeswoman said. Clips that include kids of 13 and younger will have the comments section removed. Videos featuring children aged 14 to 17 with subjects with potential for abuse, like gymnastics, will also see their comments disabled.

YouTube has used AI software to classify videos and identify specific content, but the system has had mixed results, including recommending conspiracy theories and other questionable information.

Several large advertisers, including AT&T Inc. and Kellogg Co., pulled spending from YouTube last week after comments on the service were used to identify video clips of young girls participating in activities such as posing in front of a mirror and doing gymnastics. Comments under the videos suggested potential predators were bookmarking certain points and sharing them with others. If users clicked on the clips, YouTube’s software recommended similar ones.

Episodes like this are forcing YouTube to rely less on automation and more on human monitoring and curation. On Thursday, the site said that a small number of creators can keep comments enabled on videos featuring minors only if they actively moderate the comments and “demonstrate a low risk of predatory behavior.” That will be time consuming and expensive. YouTube’s parent, Google, is a unit of Alphabet Inc.

NASA’s most prolific planet-hunter is powering down after nearly a decade of revealing the diversity of our galaxy’s planets.

The Kepler space telescope will be retired after running out of fuel nine years after its initial launch, the space agency announced Tuesday. But the innovative spacecraft enjoyed an illustrious career, discovering as many as 2,600 planets and inspiring new fields of research, NASA said. Among its chief insights: that planets far outnumber stars.

“As NASA’s first planet-hunting mission, Kepler has wildly exceeded all our expectations and paved the way for our exploration and search for life in the solar system and beyond,” said Thomas Zurbuchen of NASA’s Science Mission Directorate. “Its discoveries have shed a new light on our place in the universe, and illuminated the tantalizing mysteries and possibilities among the stars.”

The probe’s retirement was not unexpected. Kepler has been running out of fuel for months, according to Space.com. In the lead-up to its impending retirement, “scientists pushed Kepler to its full potential” by preemptively powering down the spacecraft several times to extend its lifespan. It will be deactivated while in its current orbit of the sun, far from Earth, NASA said.

Launched in March 2009, the $600 million Kepler mission searched the night sky for Earth-like planets using what’s called the “transit method.” The probe’s camera measured changes in the brightness of 150,000 stars in one patch of sky to identify alien planets, including ones that could potentially be inhabited by humans.

Read more: Eyes In the Sky: A Look at America’s Least Known Landmark

In 2013, mechanical errors made Kepler too unstable to continue its precision surveys. But scientists came up with a workaround, “K2,” that pivoted the probe’s field of view every three months and allowed it to survey more than 500,000 stars.

Over the course of its nine years, Kepler identified 2,662 planets and 61 supernovae on just 3.12 gallons of fuel. Its discoveries also supported nearly 3,000 scientific papers. Scientists said that Kepler’s data will support further research for a decade to come.

“We know the spacecraft’s retirement isn’t the end of Kepler’s discoveries,” said Jessie Dotson, Kepler’s project scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center in California. “I’m excited about the diverse discoveries that are yet to come.”

This post is in partnership with the History News Network, the website that puts the news into historical perspective. A version of the article below was originally published at HNN.

Fifty years ago, early in the evening of Thursday, April 4, 1968, as he campaigned for the Democratic presidential nomination in Indianapolis, Robert Kennedy learned of the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. He was about to deliver a speech in a predominantly African American neighborhood in that city. Deeply grieved personally, Kennedy faced the awful task of breaking the news of King’s death to a largely unsuspecting crowd. That night in Indianapolis, haunted by his own personal demons, Kennedy delivered a Gettysburg Address for the 20th century, an unscripted funeral oration that took from tragedy a vision of freedom and equality that defined the American promise.

Like Lincoln, who had seen the deaths of two children, a sister, and a beloved young mother, Kennedy spoke from his own experience of agony and loss. This made it possible for him to open his soul in ways that no other American leader, then or now, could contemplate. Kennedy’s pain over the preceding four-and-a-half years had been almost unendurable. He was not so much his assassinated brother’s alter ego as his second self. The brothers could complete each other’s sentences and communicate by glance and gesture. RFK’s identification with the late President had been so all-consuming that he had taken to wearing his clothing; indeed he was wearing JFK’s overcoat on the night of King’s murder.

Robert Kennedy spoke publicly of his brother’s death for the first time that night, shocking long-time aides who had never heard him mention it directly: “For those of you who are black and are tempted to be filled with hatred and mistrust … against all white people, I would only say that I can also feel in my own heart the same kind of feeling. I had a member of my family killed, but he was killed by a white man.”

As Lincoln had at Gettysburg, Kennedy borrowed from the past. He offered the words of the Greek poet Aeschylus, who counseled a war-weary people in another age that “in our sleep, pain which cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our own despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of god.” Kennedy asked his audience, again borrowing from the ancient Greeks, “to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world.”

Out of the mouth of any contemporary politician, these words would seem out of place, even ludicrous. But Robert Kennedy could allude to classic tragedies with conviction and authority and carry his listeners along with him because they were the product of his own personal pain and despair. Only Robert Kennedy possessed the moral authority to assume the martyred King’s mantle and ask the stunned crowd for “love and wisdom, and compassion toward one another, and a feeling of justice toward those who still suffer within our country, whether they be white or whether they be black.”

Compassion and justice. Like Lincoln a century earlier, Kennedy understood that America needed both. Also like Lincoln, Kennedy had turned his agony into wisdom. When the time came to offer its hard-earned fruits, he was ready to meet the moment.

Robert Kennedy saved lives that night. At the conclusion of his speech, the crowd dispersed quietly; alone among major American cities, Indianapolis suffered no violence in the wake of the King assassination. But, of course, Kennedy could not save his own life. Two months later, he would be dead, yet another victim of the violence engulfing the nation in that extraordinarily violent year.

It is doubtful that a speech such as Kennedy’s could have the same effect today. The cynicism and distrust that have set root in 21st century culture would make it almost impossible to reproduce the communion he forged with his devastated listeners. A contemporary candidate would also likely have been talked out of giving such a speech by risk-averse political consultants wary of its impromptu nature and racially charged subject matter. But we are a better nation for Robert Kennedy’s determination to speak from the depths of a wounded heart to others who bore similar burdens of grief. Out of two unspeakable American tragedies came a modern Gettysburg Address that continues to challenge us to live up to what America can and should be. Even in the midst of our own low, dishonest decade, his voice rings true. Like Lincoln’s, it belongs to the ages.

Jerald Podair is Professor of History and the Robert S. French Professor of American Studies at Lawrence University. He is co-writing a book about the transformation of the Republican Party in the 1960s and 1970s: “Spiro Agnew and the Making of Donald Trump’s America” (University of Virginia Press).

Every year, the Super Bowl is not only football’s biggest stage, it’s also the height of advertising.

And the 2018 Super Bowl will be no different. Just as the Philadelphia Eagles and the New England Patriots battled for the championship at the Super Bowl LII, major companies and ad agencies fought for your attention.

With more than 100 million Americans were expected to tune in for football’s biggest game, commercials for companies grow more expensive and extensive with each year. According to Sports Illustrated, NBC Sports charged more than $5 million for a 30-second spot during the Super Bowl LII.

While that’s a lot of cash, that doesn’t include the costs to create a commercial that will grab attention and make headlines. Indeed, per tradition, the Super Bowl ads this year feature a slew of celebrities, cameos and special effects.

The Eagles won the 2018 Super Bowl, but these ads won the commercial breaks.

The Best Cameos

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos took a break from taking over the world to appear in his company’s Super Bowl commercial. But he wasn’t the only high-profile individual to make an appearance. Celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay, rapper Cardi B, actress Rebel Wilson and actor Anthony Hopkins took a shot at replacing Amazon’s Alexa in this 90-second ad. And, yes, we all now want Cardi B’s voice to replace Alexa’s for good. (We can assume that decision will be up to Bezos.)

 

While Amazon delivered with the cameos, Lionel Richie’s appearance in TD Ameritrade’s Super Bowl commercial is hard to beat. The ad shows representatives from the online brokerage trying to persuade Richie to reference his 1983 hit “All Night Long” to promote the company’s 24-hour, five-day-a-week trading. “Well, it means I can trade after the market closes,” Richie says. “It’s true,” one representative says. “So, All…” “Evening long,” Richie responds. Other ideas from Richie: “All Night through its entirety” and “the time from sunset to sunrise,” or “from darkness to light.”

The Best Running Joke

Tide’s use of Stranger Things’s David Harbour and hilarious running jokes almost made viewers forget about the whole Tide Pods thing. Harbour stars in Tide’s Super Bowl commercial, where he appears in a series of spots that appear more fit for cars, beers, diamonds, soda, mattresses and deodorant. Each mini-ad within the commercial is, in fact, a Tide ad, Harbour tells viewers.

The most memorable part of the campaign was a bit of Proctor & Gamble cross-brand genius. Isaiah Mustafa, who’s best known in the advertising world as face of Old Spice. Instead of an Old Spice bottle, a Tide detergent bottle appears out of thin air in Mustafa’s hand as he sits shirtless on top of a white horse. Harbour sits behind him to remind the viewers that it was, indeed, a Tide ad.

Procter & Gamble owns both Tide and Old Spice, lest we forget.

The Best Break in Tradition

The Budweiser Clydesdales took a break once again this year in the company’s new and emotional Super Bowl commercial. Instead of promoting its beer, Budweiser used its ad to show the work that went into bottling water this year in response to numerous natural disasters all over the world, including in Puerto Rico and California. Budweiser has donated 79 million cans of drinking water in response crises around the world during the last 30 years, the company said. The ad, which follows one factory worker who helps bottle the water, is set to the song “Stand By Me.” Last year, Budweiser’s ad focused on the story of its co-founder, who immigrated from Germany to the U.S.

The Best Dumb Joke

Febreze went all in on the story of “The Only Man Whose Bleep Don’t Stink.” That is, the only guy who doesn’t leave behind a gross smell when he exits the bathroom. This documentary-style commercial focuses on the story of this man — Dave — with interviews with his parents, his former wrestling coach and his ex-girlfriend. The stand-outs, certainly, are Dave’s parents: “My friend — her son’s a lawyer. But, my son — his bleep don’t stink,” says the mom. “That’s better than being a lawyer,” the dad responds proudly.

The Best Appeal to Football-Watching Bros

Chances are you’ve heard the phrase “Dilly Dilly.” Bud Light’s popular catchphrase — perhaps most commonly used amongst college-aged boys — returns in the company’s two-part Super Bowl commercial. Set in a fantastical world a la Game of Thrones, the ad builds upon others from the company that results in a battle between the underdogs and an eager army — all over a few cases of Bud Light. The battle concludes when the Bud Knight gallops into the battle on horseback, grabs some beer for himself then uses his sword to conjure some kind of magical power that wins the battle for the underdogs.

The Best Thing That Could’ve Happened to Lexus

In perhaps the most conveniently timed Super Bowl commercial of all, Lexus and Marvel partnered to create a commercial that somehow leads you to believe the Black Panther drives a 2018 Lexus LS 500 F Sport. The cool-factor of the luxury car, which is available this month, is greatly aided by the star of the highly anticipated Marvel film Black Panther, which comes out Friday, Feb. 16. King T’Challa, played by Chadwick Boseman, stars in the ad, where he runs through the streets and leaps in the air, diving through the car’s sunroof.

The Best Reminder That We Do Not Deserve Tiffany Haddish

Groupon has kindly reminded us all that we do not deserve comedian Tiffany Haddish. The break-out star of Girls Trip graces Groupon with her presence and asks, “What kind of person wouldn’t want to support local business?” The ad then flashes to a wealthy man, saying he does not support local businesses, and opens the door only to get punted in the stomach with a football. That must’ve not felt too good, responds Haddish with her iconic laugh.

The Best Song of Ice and Fire

A Doritos-Mountain Dew battle is afoot, and apparently actors Peter Dinklage and Morgan Freeman are the representatives for each. The commercial features a rap battle between the two actors, with Dinklage sinisterly lip-synching Busta Rhymes’s verse on “Look At Me Now”and Freeman retorting with Missy Elliot’s “Get Your Freak On.” More can be expected to the ad, as Doritos says “only one can win.”(And, yes, Games of Thrones fans have already pointed out that Tyrion Lannister himself is in a Super Bowl commercial that could, in fact, convey The Song of Ice and Fire.)

The Best Message

Following the path set by its commercials of the past, Coca-Cola used its Super Bowl commercial this year to celebrate diversity. Called “The Wonder of Us,” minute-long commercial shows people around the world drinking different Coca-Cola products. A poem accompanying the ad notes that there’s a Coke out there “for he, and she, and her, and me, and them,” which elicited positive responses from some consumer who lauded the company for recognizing gender neutral people.

The Best Ad for Sad Minnesota Vikings Fans

Ram Trucks promoted its new Ram 1500 with the help of a group of vikings, excitedly heading to the Super Bowl in Minneapolis. The Vikings were in for a surprise, though, when they appear to find out the Minnesota Vikings indeed did not make it to football’s biggest game. The best part of the ad? The warning at the end: “Never ride in the bed of a truck unless you are an authentic Viking.”

The Best Touchdown Celebration

Sure, the Eagles and the Patriots were the ones actually scoring at the Super Bowl this year, but the New York Giants may have the best touchdown celebrations. In a commercial for the NFL, Odel Beckham, Jr., and Eli Manning of the New York Giants channeled their best moves during a touchdown celebration in practice — with the duo even completing the iconic lift from Dirty Dancing.

The Most Non-Political Political Ad

In a Super Bowl all but devoid of politics, Illinois-based car floor liner company WeatherTech came closet to political commentary. The commercial showed the construction of a new 125,000-square-foot facility in Bolingbrook. The spot ended with the simple message, “At WeatherTech, we built our new factory in America. Isn’t that the way it’s supposed to be?” WeatherTech has long advertised that its products are made in the United States.

The Best of Famous Actors Doing Weird Things

Danny DeVito being the human version of an M&M is probably one of those things that you’ve never thought about. But once you do, it all makes so much sense.

Meanwhile, Friends star David Schwimmer keeps up with Skittle’s odd sense of humor in the teasers for its 2018 Super Bowl commercial.

And Bill Hader shows off his comedic range in Pringles’s Super Bowl ad, where he says “wow” in the most obscure ways possible.

Other Honorable Mentions

Perhaps still recovering from its controversial 2017 ad featuring Kendall Jenner, Pepsi stuck to its roots in its 2018 Super Bowl commercial. The ad looks back at the company’s past, with an appearance from Cindy Crawford and a shout-out to Britney Spears.

Chris Pratt trains to star in Michelob Ultra’s Super Bowl commercial by running, lifting and practicing his poses — but ends up being directed to the line of extras for it instead.

Australia’s biggest movie stars — and Danny McBride — came to support tourism to the Land Down Under in a Super Bowl commercial that appeared more like a trailer for a film called “Dundee.” Chris Hemsworth, Hugh Jackman, Margot Robbie, Russell Crowe, Isla Fisher, Ruby Rose, Liam Hemsworth, Jessica Mauboy and Luke Bracey star alongside McBride in the commercial.

In the midst of the post-holiday glow, Instagram on Thursday introduced what at first appeared to be an update that required users to swipe side-to-side through their feed as opposed to scrolling up and down. And, as might be expected with any major change to a social media platform, the Internet did not take kindly to the update and sounded off accordingly and with much outrage.

The Instagram update didn’t affect everyone. But users who received it found that they needed to horizontally swipe through the posts on their feed, and also discovered that they could “tap” through the posts, much like one would while going through Instagram Stories.

According to a tweet from Instagram head Adam Mosseri, the social media company debuted the changes early on Thursday morning as a part of what was meant to be a “small test” of the new features — but the test was accidentally sent out more widely than anticipated.

“Due to a bug, some users saw a change to the way their feed appears today,” said an Instagram spokesperson in a statement. “We quickly fixed the issue and feed is back to normal. We apologize for any confusion.”

While the update has been rolled back (those who are still experiencing it are advised to restart their apps), it hasn’t stopped the Internet from letting Instagram know exactly how they feel about the potential changes, which may or may not arrive in a future update.

Some Internet users have found the bright side to the Instagram update debacle, however.

 

Shafi Ahmed dons a pair of digital sunglasses and explains how the tiny lenses built into its black plastic frame, which can capture high-resolution images, are transforming how doctors get trained in operating rooms.

The British colorectal surgeon used Snap Inc.’s high-tech spectacles a year ago to walk rookie physicians and millions of curious viewers through a hernia operation using the Snapchat photo-sharing app. In 2018, he plans to beam his avatar into operating rooms with so-called immersive technology, which spans everything from military training to adult entertainment, and promises to support the next generation of doctors with real-time supervision and tutelage.

“Doctors do not need to feel out of their depth, and this technology will allow them to get help whenever required,” says Ahmed, whose early adoption of digital technology and social media has seen him recognized as the planet’s most-watched surgeon, with more than 2 million views and 50 million Twitter posts for the Snapchat surgery alone. “We all need support and help when faced with a tricky situation.”

Ahmed’s well-publicized, public approach rankles some members of a very conservative profession. Yet he says it represents one of the best ways to meet the World Health Organization’s call to “scale up transformative, high-quality education” and plug a predicted global shortfall of 15 million health workers by 2030.

A report by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery estimated in 2015 that 5 billion people lack access to safe, affordable surgical and anesthesia care, leading to about 17 million deaths annually. Saving lives will require a doubling of the surgical workforce, or an extra 2.2 million surgeons, anesthetists and obstetricians over 15 years, the report said.

‘Great Interest’

“It’s not just that we have a shortage of health professionals, we also, as a consequence, have a shortage of teachers,” said Josip Car, an associate professor of health services outcomes research at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University’s Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine.

Car is working in collaboration with the WHO on the world’s largest systematic review of evidence on the effectiveness of digital learning. It’s a field, he says, that is attracting “great interest,” but which requires careful evaluation.

“The evidence appears to suggest that, on the whole, these technologies are likely to be equivalent to traditional modes of education,” Car said in a telephone interview. “If this turns out to be so, that’s very good news because many of them allow scalability and flexibility of learning.”

Already, technological innovations are increasing the automation of diagnoses and personalized treatments, and medical schools are incorporating them into their teaching. For example, California’s Stanford Medicine is combining imaging from MRIs, CT scans and angiograms with a new software system to create a three-dimensional model that physicians and patients can see and manipulate.

‘Ripe for Disruption’

“Medical education is ripe for disruption,” said Marc M. Triola, associate dean for educational informatics at NYU Langone Health in New York. “Cutting-edge technologies such as virtual and augmented reality may quickly become standard-of-care and mainstream.”

Ahmed used Microsoft Corp.’s HoloLens headsets to virtually bring together surgeons from the BMI London Independent Hospital and Tata Memorial Hospital in Mumbai to operate together on a bowel-cancer patient in October. Each colleague was able to view tumor scans that appeared as 3D holograms, and could “see” each other as graphic avatars, standing and speaking as if together in the operating room at the Royal London Hospital.

Connecting People

“My story is about connecting people globally,” Ahmed, 48, said in his office at the London Independent Hospital. An associate dean of Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, the Bangladesh-born surgeon performed the world’s first virtual reality operation recorded and streamed live in 360-degree, or immersive, video in 2016.

It was viewed live by 55,000 people in 142 countries and downloaded 200,000 times on YouTube, he said. Ahmed co-founded Medical Realities Ltd., which began last April offering a free virtual reality interactive learning module for surgical trainees.

While virtual reality isn’t new in health-care, its affordability is: Medical headsets have traditionally cost from $30,000 to $300,000, according to a World Economic Forum report on emerging technologies. Facebook Inc.’s Oculus Go wireless headset, meant to be the company’s most accessible VR device, will cost $199 when it’s released in early 2018.

Rapid Growth

That’s helping to stoke a market for virtual reality hardware and software that’s poised to expand 54 percent annually over the next five years, reaching almost $27 billion by 2022, Sarasota, Florida-based Zion Market Research said in a report in October.

The global digital health market, which includes everything from fitness apps and wearable devices to consultations over the Internet, will reach $537 billion by 2025 from $196 billion in 2017, Transparency Market Research said in September. Philips Healthcare, McKesson Corp., Allscripts Healthcare Solutions Inc., Cerner Corp., and Agfa-Gevaert N.V. are among companies benefiting from the growth, the Albany, New York-based firm said.

Continuous innovations are needed to meet the changing demands and future challenges of medicine, said Luke Slawomirski, a health economist and policy analyst with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development in Paris.

‘Hero Physician’

“The skills and attributes needed by health-care providers will be very different in the future,” said Slawomirski, who trained as a doctor. “Soft skills like communication, teamwork and adaptability to complex environments will be essential. The days of the hero physician are over: Health care is now all about teamwork, relationships and trust.”

Watching operations online won’t provide essential surgical training, and nothing can replace the experience of interacting with real patients, said John Quinn, a vascular surgeon in Brisbane, Australia, and the executive director of surgical affairs with the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

“Just watching a picture of something being done doesn’t teach you terribly much,” said Quinn, who completed his surgical training in the early 1980s. “You have got to be able to touch and feel and do all sorts of other things.”

Privacy Concern

The Australasian College isn’t in favor of live-streaming surgeries because of privacy concerns and the potential to distract and pressure the surgeon, he said.

“It’s treating surgery more as entertainment,” Quinn said. “It’s almost voyeuristic and putting people’s privacy greatly at risk, while they are showing things around the world to all sorts of people.”

Ahmed says that, beside the training function of his online operations, engaging with and educating the public helps to demystify surgery and make it more transparent.

“We have to challenge dogma and tradition in health,” said Ahmed, who won a national training award in 2015 and is on the council of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. “Unless you challenge, you will settle with mediocrity, stuck in the Dark Ages.”