A big picture view on the global economy, on the «hardware» and «software» capitalism runs on. At its core, a pretty bold argument worth pondering: «The global economy is getting a hardware refit and trying out a new operating system—in effect, a full reboot, the likes of which we have not seen in nearly a century. [..] «We need to abandon any illusion that the worldwide turn toward right-wing populism and economic nationalism is merely a temporary error.»

Can you picture Elon Musk jumping around with his chainsaw? Sure you can. Can you picture Donald Trump smirking as he signs executive orders? Sure you can. Can you picture 4.5 million dead children? Unfathomable. And yet, these things are the same. The aid program cuts – orchestrated by Musk, enabled by Trump – that went into effect this week could mean death for between 8 and 19 million people, including 4.5 million children. This estimate comes from a new study published by the medical journal Lancet. Millions of people dead who could live. And for what?

Rebecca Solnit, always clarifying to read. In her latest essay, she writes about «near enemies». By those, she means all the cynics, political hobbyists, defeatists on the sidelines «who in theory agree with our goals but in practice are forever sabotaging them» – by criticising tactics, by calling goals unrealistic, by calling activists naive to try. In times like these, Solnit writes, «no one should be on the sidelines, and no one should be undermining those who are showing up for justice, human rights, and environmental protection.»

A brilliant experiment by Swiss public broadcaster SRF for the women’s football Euro that kicked off in Switzerland this week. They brought to life the findings of an interesting Norwegian study: Given that women play on the same pitch as (physically stronger men), what would a football pitch have to look like to feel the same for men? Larger goals, a much larger pitch, a heavier ball, and 18 extra minutes of game time. The two teams of young men who took part in the experiment left the pitch exhausted and humbled. (If you don’t understand German, Google Translate is your friend.)

Amid all the maddening and saddening things I read this week, this was a moment of bliss. A wonderful essay on taste as an essential quality in an environment of infinite content and attention directed by algorithms. So many quotes I vehemently nodded to and saved for later. Like this: «Taste is how you protect your mental environment. […] Real taste. The kind that signals coherence. Clarity. The ability to choose what matters in a world drowning in what doesn’t.» Or this: «What you give your attention to—what you consume, what you engage with, what you amplify—becomes a reflection of how you think.» And obviously this, pretty much the essence of what I’ve been doing with this newsletter since 2011: «Curation is care. It says: I thought about this. I chose it. […] I took the time to decide what was worth passing on.»

Why has Israel decided to attack Iran now? What does it mean for other countries in the region? And what’s next? A good in-depth conversation with Iranian historian and writer Arash Azizi.

What happens if we get AI right? An intriguing conversation with Kevin Kelly, who has been thinking about technology longer than most. One bit that stood out to me is when Kelly argues how artificial intelligence will make us better humans – not by enhancing our cognitive capabilities, but because training AI to be ethical will require us to re-examine and improve our own ethics.

A compelling visual interpretation of a simple study: What happens when two complete strangers meet and have to talk for 30 minutes?

«What first seems a chaotic mix of scandal, megalomaniac ideas, and US policy failures, now emerges as a clear and persistent pattern in which you can see the ten tools of fascism coalesce.» In this translated piece from Dutch magazine De Correspondent, Rosan Smits unpacks how modern fascism quietly builds its power by exploiting democracy’s own rules. And urges us to see what’s really happening before it’s too late.

When the Paris climate agreement was signed nearly ten years ago, it looked like worldwide coal use might finally be falling. And fall it must, along with the other dirty sources of energy. However, the past few years show a different trend: demand for the dirtiest of dirty energy sources is still rising. This FT analysis explains why.