Findings in title quoted from the linked summary^1 with reference to its hyperlinked peer-reviewed article.^2

From the linked summary:^1

>A University of Queensland-led study has found that contrary to popular belief, snakes can hear and react to airborne sound.

>Dr Christina Zdenek from UQ’s School of Biological Sciences, in collaboration with Queensland University of Technology’s Professor Damian Candusso, played three different sound frequencies to captive-bred snakes one at a time in a soundproof room and observed their reactions.

>“Because snakes don’t have external ears, people typically think they’re deaf and can only feel vibrations through the ground and into their bodies,” Dr Zdenek said.

>The reactions strongly depended on the genus of the snakes.

>“Only the woma python tended to move toward sound, while taipans, brown snakes and especially death adders were all more likely to move away from it,” Dr Zdenek said.

>“The types of behavioural reactions also differed, with taipans in particular more likely to exhibit defensive and cautious responses to sound.

>“For example, woma pythons are large nocturnal snakes with fewer predators than smaller species and probably don’t need to be as cautious, so they tended to approach sound,” Dr Zdenek said.

>“Snakes are very vulnerable, timid creatures that hide most of the time, and we still have so much to learn about them.”

From the hyperlinked article:^2

>The snakes ranged in morphological body shapes and foraging types, including active foragers, ambush predators, arboreal species, and constrictor feeders.

^1 Snakes can hear more than you think, University of Queensland, 15 Feb. 2023, https://stories.uq.edu.au/news/2023/snakes-can-hear-more-than-you-think/index.html

^2 Zdenek CN, Staples T, Hay C, Bourke LN, Candusso D (2023) Sound garden: How snakes respond to airborne and groundborne sounds. PLoS ONE 18(2): e0281285. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281285

From the linked release:^1

>At 1.5 km from the pad, the maximum noise level reached 136 decibels. At a 5.2 km distance, the noise was 129 decibels, nearly 20 decibels higher than predicted by a prelaunch noise model.

^1 The Roar and Crackle of Artemis 1, AIP Publishing, 14 Feb. 2023, https://publishing.aip.org/publications/latest-content/the-roar-and-crackle-of-artemis-1/

Excerpt from the linked release^1 by AIP Publishing about noise measurements taken at five stations located 1.5 km to 5.2 km from the launch pad:^2

>When the Artemis 1 mission was launched by NASA’s Space Launch System, SLS, in November, it became the world’s most powerful rocket, exceeding the thrust of the previous record holder, Saturn 5, by 13%.

>With liftoff came a loud roar heard miles away.

>In JASA Express Letters, published on behalf of the Acoustical Society of America by AIP Publishing, researchers from Brigham Young University and Rollins College in Florida reported noise measurements during the launch at different locations around Kennedy Space Center.

>The data collected can be used to validate existing noise prediction models, which are needed to protect equipment as well as the surrounding environment and community.

>These data will be useful as more powerful lift vehicles, including the SLS series, are developed.

> 

>“We hope these early results will help prevent the spread of possible misinformation, as happened with the Saturn 5,” author Kent Gee said.

>“Numerous websites and discussion forums suggested sound levels that were far too high, with inaccurate reports of the Saturn 5’s sound waves melting concrete and causing grass fires.”

>A characteristic feature of rocket launches is a crackling sound from shock waves.

>These shocks represent instantaneous sound pressure increases that are much louder than crackling noises encountered in everyday life.

>Author Whitney Coyle said, “We found the Artemis-I noise level at 5 km had a crackling quality about 40 million times greater than a bowl of Rice Krispies.”

^1 The Roar and Crackle of Artemis 1, AIP Publishing, 14 Feb. 2023, https://publishing.aip.org/publications/latest-content/the-roar-and-crackle-of-artemis-1/

^2 Kent L. Gee, et al. Space Launch System acoustics: Far-field noise measurements of the Artemis-I launch. JASA Express Letters 3, 023601 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0016878

Excerpt from the linked release^1 by AIP Publishing about noise measurements taken at five stations located 1.5 km to 5.2 km from the launch pad:^2

>When the Artemis 1 mission was launched by NASA’s Space Launch System, SLS, in November, it became the world’s most powerful rocket, exceeding the thrust of the previous record holder, Saturn 5, by 13%.

>With liftoff came a loud roar heard miles away.

>In JASA Express Letters, published on behalf of the Acoustical Society of America by AIP Publishing, researchers from Brigham Young University and Rollins College in Florida reported noise measurements during the launch at different locations around Kennedy Space Center.

>The data collected can be used to validate existing noise prediction models, which are needed to protect equipment as well as the surrounding environment and community.

>These data will be useful as more powerful lift vehicles, including the SLS series, are developed.

> 

>“We hope these early results will help prevent the spread of possible misinformation, as happened with the Saturn 5,” author Kent Gee said.

>“Numerous websites and discussion forums suggested sound levels that were far too high, with inaccurate reports of the Saturn 5’s sound waves melting concrete and causing grass fires.”

>A characteristic feature of rocket launches is a crackling sound from shock waves.

>These shocks represent instantaneous sound pressure increases that are much louder than crackling noises encountered in everyday life.

>Author Whitney Coyle said, “We found the Artemis-I noise level at 5 km had a crackling quality about 40 million times greater than a bowl of Rice Krispies.”

^1 The Roar and Crackle of Artemis 1, AIP Publishing, 14 Feb. 2023, https://publishing.aip.org/publications/latest-content/the-roar-and-crackle-of-artemis-1/

^2 Kent L. Gee, et al. Space Launch System acoustics: Far-field noise measurements of the Artemis-I launch. JASA Express Letters 3, 023601 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0016878

Excerpt from the linked content^1 by John-Clark Levin:

>Today’s headlines treat the metaverse as a hazy dream yet to be built, but if it’s defined as a network of virtual worlds we can inhabit, its oldest extant corner has been already running for 25 years.

>It’s a medieval fantasy kingdom created for the online role-playing game Ultima Online—and it has already endured a quarter-century of market competition, economic turmoil, and political strife.

>Ultima Online—UO to its fans—was not the first online fantasy game. As early as 1980, “multi-user dungeons,” known as MUDs, offered text-based role-playing adventures hosted on university computers connected via Arpanet.

>With the birth of the World Wide Web in 1991, a handful of graphical successors like Kingdom of Drakkar and Neverwinter Nights followed—allowing dozens or hundreds of players at a time to slay monsters together in a shared digital space.

>In 1996 the “massively multiplayer” genre was born, and titles such as Baram and Meridian 59 attracted tens of thousands of paying subscribers.

> 

>But in 1997, Ultima transformed the industry with a revolutionary ambition: simulating an entire world.

>Instead of small, static environments that were mainly backdrops for combat, UO offered a vast, dynamic realm where players could interact with almost anything—fruit could be picked off trees, books could be taken off shelves and actually read.

>Unlike previous games where everyone was a heroic knight or wizard, Ultima realized a whole alternative society—with players taking on the roles of bakers, beggars, blacksmiths, pirates, and politicians.

>Perhaps most important, Ultima let people really live there.

>In most previous games, players occupied areas while logged in but had no persistent presence while offline.

>In short, [Ultima] promised to be a place.

^1 John-Clark Levin is an author and journalist at the intersection of technology, security, and policy. MIT Technology Review, 17 Feb. 2023, https://www.technologyreview.com/2023/02/17/1068027/ultima-online-oldest-metaverse/

Excerpt from the linked release^1 by Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution:

>WHOI is debuting 80 minutes of rare video footage from the 1986 expedition to explore the famous wreck.

>The newly released video highlights the remarkable achievement by the team to bring iconic images of the ship back to the surface.

>On September 1, 1985, a team from Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) led by Dr. Robert Ballard in partnership with Institut français de recherche pour l’exploitation de la mer (IFEMER) discovered the final resting place of the ship.

>In July 1986, nine months after the discovery, a team from WHOI returned to the wreck site, this time using three-person research submersible Alvin and the newly developed remotely operated vehicle Jason Jr.

>The trip marked the first time that humans laid eyes on the vessel since its ill-fated voyage in 1912.

Video highlights include:

>• Captured in July 1986 from cameras on HOV Alvin and ROV Jason Jr, most of this footage has never been released for public viewing.

>• Footage begins with Alvin approaching Titanic exploring the bow and parking on its deck.

>• Split screen views syncing camera feeds from Alvin and Jason Jr. as the smaller vehicle leaves Alvin to explore the wreck.

>• Interior shots of Titanic from Jason Jr

^1 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution releases rare video footage from the first submersible dives to RMS Titanic, 15 Feb. 2023, https://www.whoi.edu/press-room/news-release/woods-hole-oceanographic-institution-releases-rare-video-footage-from-the-first-submersible-dives-to-rms-titanic/

Excerpt from the linked content^1 by Aaron Elstein:

>Since the pandemic changed where people work, Manhattan’s office landlords have struggled to come to grips with the changed world.

>This week Vornado Realty Trust CEO Steven Roth reached Elizabeth Kubler Ross’s final stage of grief when he acknowledged the days of workers commuting to the office five days a week are, well, gone with the wind.

>“You can assume that Friday is dead forever,” Roth said. “Monday is touch and go.”

>His epiphany is shared by the CEOs of SL Green Realty and RXR Realty and even Mayor Eric Adams.

>The latest data from Kastle Systems shows 48.6% of New Yorkers have returned to the office.

>Let’s turn back the clock to September 2020, to an interview by Crain’s reporter Natalie Sachmechi with RXR’s Scott Rechler.

>“To me, it’s a civic duty to responsibly come back to work and actively engage in being part of the community,” Rechler said. “I make the analogy that, post-9/11, people didn’t flee and hide in fear of another act of terrorism, even though that risk existed.”

> 

>Roth of Vornado felt the same way in November 2020.

>“For sure, normalcy will return…And I believe return to normalcy will be the order of the day in months, not in years,” he said on an earnings call.

>“Most importantly, we are hearing from all our tenants that Zoom fatigue is real, productivity is now, and CEOs want their employees back in the office.”

>By the spring of 2021, the pandemic was a year old and new workplace habits were hardening into cement. Even so, SL Green’s Holliday said he didn’t see much of a future for hybrid work.

>By November 2021 Roth realized that something had changed.

>“I must admit that our tenants and we are a little frustrated by how long the return to work process is taking,” he said. But there's no doubt that work in office will win over work alone at the kitchen table.”

>Last December [in 2022], New York’s biggest commercial landlord effectively admitted his optimism about return-to-office had been misplaced. “The hybrid work model has persisted far longer than I expected it to,” Holliday said.

^1 Tracking stages of grief for city office landlords, Aaron Elstein for Crain Communications, 15 Feb. 2023, https://www.crainsnewyork.com/commercial-real-estate/tracking-stages-grief-new-york-city-office-landlords

Further reading:^2

>More than $16B in CMBS loans are coming due for New York City building owners this year, a 30% increase over last year’s $12.7B in mortgage-backed loan maturities, according to Trepp.

^2 NYC building owners face $16B in CMBS loans due in 2023 — The total is 30% higher than last year and some lenders are balking at extensions, Jack Rogers for EagleTree Capital’s GlobeSt., 26 Jan. 2023, https://www.globest.com/2023/01/26/nyc-building-owners-face-16b-in-cmbs-loans-due-in-2023/

Linked content is about a pre-foreclosure action^1 filed against Joe Sitt’s Thor Equities, by a special servicing unit of Barry Sternlicht’s Starwood Capital Group acting for CMBS bondholders.

The complaint alleges that the $105-million loan remains in default since 6 Aug. 2020, after “the occurrence of multiple defaults” prior to a modification of the loan agreement.

Further reading:^1

>11. On or about June 5, 2014, UBS Real Estate Securities Inc. (“Original Lender”) made a loan to Borrower in the original principal amount of $105,000,000 (the “Loan”).

>52. Following the occurrence of multiple defaults committed by Borrower under the Loan, Lender, Borrower, and Guarantor entered into a Loan Modification Agreement dated as of May 11, 2020 (the “Modification Agreement”) and effective as of April 6, 2020 (the “Effective Date”).

>62. Borrower failed to pay the full amount due under the Loan Agreement, the Modification Agreement, and the other Loan Documents on the August 6, 2020 Monthly Payment Date, and on each Monthly Payment Date thereafter (each, a “Payment Default,” and collectively, the “Payment Defaults”).

>71. Borrower has failed to pay the amounts due on the Loan in full and remains in default under the Note, Mortgage, Loan Agreement, Modification Agreement and the other Loan Documents.

^1 Complaint, filed 10 Feb. 2023, https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=wwUQtlrznFJUWGQfun/3IA==&TSPD_101_R0=08533cd43fab200066a2a223904670fc3e387ceed210ae85aa37a47b8180ee5223a889801c9aa65708c7c44af9143000fb8be8ebddce2c3215ba5ee47b632505e1b522ffdd1856b0e851bc470069650580ccc56c9bbd82ce7ab1b79d481d4be0

Findings in title quoted from the linked summary^1 and its hyperlinked journal paper^2 examining the call of the wild.

From the linked summary^1 released by Eötvös Loránd University:

>[Department of Ethology] researchers tested 68 purebred family dogs by playing back recordings of wolf howls and observing their reactions in a behavioural laboratory.

>To test the effect of the breed, the different breeds’ genetic similarity to wolves (so-called “root distance”) was used as a measure.

>“According to our results, breeds which are genetically more similar to wolves (“ancient breeds”), are more prone to reply with their own howls to wolf howl playbacks. On the other hand, breeds more distantly related to wolves (“modern breeds”) typically reacted with barking instead of howls.

>“It seems that although howling is present in most breeds’ repertoire, it lost its functionality due to the changed social environment, thus, modern breeds do not use it in adequate situations” - explains Fanni Lehoczki, the first author of the study.

>“Additionally, we found that breeds which howl more also show more stress-related behaviours in this situation. We assume that more ancient breeds, which are genetically closer to wolves, can process the information encoded in wolf howls better than modern breeds.

>“Thus, ancient breeds of our study might become stressed by intruding on a pack’s territory and use howling for the sake of avoidance, just as wolves do.” - says Tamás Faragó, postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Ethology, ELTE and the senior author of the study.

^1 The wilderness is calling — will your dog answer?, Eötvös Loránd University, 6 Feb. 2023, https://ttk.elte.hu/en/content/the-wilderness-is-calling-will-your-dog-answer.t.6415

^2 F. Lehoczki, A. Andics, A. Kershenbaum, et al. Genetic distance from wolves affects family dogs’ reactions towards howls. Communications Biology 6, 129 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-023-04450-9