An important query with satisfying answers. For the US, at least.

Ukrainian forces beat attacks on five points across the war frontline on Sunday as Russia’s troops resorted to using old weapons and equipment while shelling the frontline, military officials said in the latest update from the battlefield. At least two people were killed and a dozen more injured in Russia’s shelling of the southern Kherson region. The attacks were repelled in five areas of the eastern front – Kupiansk, Bakhmut, Lyman, Avdiivka, and Marinka – along the 1,000km-long (600mile) front, the general staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine said in its evening report. A total of 33 skirmishes were recorded during the day by Ukraine, the battlefield update added. Russian forces also mounted six air attacks and 20 strikes from multiple-launch rocket systems (MLRS), inflicting casualties among military personnel and the civilian population, the general staff said, calling the situation difficult. Russia has scaled up its presence in the eastern hotspot of the conflict and deployed its reserves north of Bakhmut to stop Ukraine’s advancing counteroffensive in Donetsk oblast, the spokesperson for the Eastern Group of Forces Illia Yevlash said on Saturday. He confirmed a total of 774 Russian strikes on the Kupiansk and Lyman direction which had seen intense fighting in the past week. The eastern and southern parts of Ukraine have seen the majority of Russia’s offensive in the continuing invasion since February and have now become the two key theatres of Kyiv’s counteroffensive. In southern Ukraine, troops have been repelling Russian forces in an inch-by-inch fight by capturing clusters of villages as they pushed toward the Sea of Azov to cut Vladimir Putin’s access to a land bridge created by Russian forces controlling the areas of south and east. Russian troops have now started using older weaponry – howitzers and cannons – in an evidence that Ukrainian forces had been successful in knocking out enemy equipment, spokesperson for troops in the south Oleksandr Shtupun told national television. "Sadly, the Russians have plenty of equipment," he said. Top military officials said Russia was continuing to mass its reserves. "Our troops are performing their assignments with the aim of proceeding with our advance,” general Oleksandr Syrskyi, head of Ukraine’s ground forces, said. He had met troops and commanders engaged in offensive operations near Bakhmut which was taken by Russian forces in May after months of battles. Read More Ukraine-Russia war – live: Putin inflicts ‘terrible’ shelling as Kyiv warn of record drone attacks Days after deadly missile strike on Ukrainian cafe, grief and a search for answers ‘You can still smell the blood’: Inside the village where more than 50 were killed by a Russian missile Footage from inside Kharkiv apartment captures aftermath of deadly strike What are Russia’s Iskander missiles? The weapon which killed 52 following funeral near Kharkiv

By Saturday evening, as has become protocol but also a frustrating norm, Howard Webb felt he had no choice but to apologise to Liverpool for the Luis Diaz decision. Jurgen Klopp might well repeat the question as to who that actually helps, but a failure to communicate such a sentiment would have made it worse. That’s partly because it is actually a failure of communication that is at the core of the controversy, which now poses a genuine credibility crisis for the Premier League. "It's an image problem," as one involved figure put it, with Liverpool themselves describing the situation as “unacceptable” in an unprecedented statement. Because, for all the focus on the nature of VAR, this is an issue that really comes down to basic human error. The details at the root of the story, though, are remarkable. If we are to take the referees’ body Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL)’s explanation at face value – that this represented a “momentary lapse in concentration” – the VAR didn’t actually know what it was supposed to be looking at. Darren England and Dan Cook thought they were checking whether a goal should stand, rather than an offside call as referee Simon Hooper ruled, which was partly why the decision was made so quickly. It ended up creating the farcical situation that a communication of “check complete” led to a fair strike being wrongly disallowed in a completely preventable fashion. After that, how was it that play was allowed to proceed, given those involved would have had immediate knowledge that this was wrong? The IFAB rules dictate that play cannot be called back once it has resumed, but was no one watching in the meantime? Would hasty shouts not have been made as soon as they saw Spurs shaping to take the free kick? It has since emerged that the VAR and fourth official team of England, Cook and Michael Oliver were officiating a game in the UAE Pro League as late as Thursday evening, which has raised fair questions within the game over fatigue was a potential explanation for that “momentary lapse in concentration”. Whatever the reason, it has created a credibility crisis, to go with much wider-reaching controversies like the unresolved Financial Fair Play cases involving Manchester City and Everton. That is all the worse for the Premier League since this is an issue the competition prides itself on and is seen as a significant factor in its status as the most popular league in the world. Fans could trust what they were seeing. Instead, this latest controversy also comes on the back of a long-term and increasing hostility and suspicion of VAR from a significant part of football's support. It was for this reason that Webb was recently brought in as PGMOL chief in the first place, and many within the game say he has been gradually realising the scale of the challenge. Hostility to VAR goes hand in hand with a widely perceived “crisis” in the level of refereeing, which is commonly cited as the worst in years. It should be stressed that this is all in circumstances where officials are under far more scrutiny than ever before. There are more cameras to reveal every element of a decision – and whether they should have taken a different one – in a manner that was unimaginable in the supposed golden days right up to the mid-2000s. Even Klopp acknowledged the extreme “pressure” on officials, which undoubtedly plays into errors that they obviously don’t make “on purpose”, as the Liverpool manager put it. Discussions such as this should never go without mentioning how the real crisis with refereeing is at lower levels, and the scale of the abuse they receive. It has undeniably affected the talent pool at the top, and there is a bigger debate to be had over whether it should be a better-remunerated profession to match both the talent they are overseeing and their necessity in getting the game played. The introduction of VAR itself was nevertheless supposed to be a remedy for all of this and – at its core – an “aid” for referees. It has instead had the inadvertent effect of making all discussion much more poisonous and pressurised. That comes from a disconnect between the implied expectation and stated intention of VAR, the actual application and the communication. The very nature of the technology has created an expectation of perfection, even though it was only ever supposed to improve accuracy to around 98 per cent. This has happened, but the fundamental problem is that the remaining 2 per cent tend to be hugely high-profile errors. That is by definition given the threshold for VAR to get involved. There has previously been very little communication on how those decisions were made, which has had the effect of only deepening suspicion among supporters. The vacuum of information inevitably leads to speculation and then to conspiracy theories. While this isn’t to say there is any legitimacy whatsoever in the latter, since the most likely explanation is always basic human error, it does have the real-world effect of further toxifying the atmosphere around refereeing. This in turn puts even more pressure on them, because their integrity is unfairly questioned. It is why the very technology of VAR has deepened this problem. Whereas error could previously have been written off as officials going off their own sight and instinct – even if the reason VAR was introduced was because of criticism of referees in the first place – they now have access to so much more technological aid. Many more fans consequently see the only possible explanation as some kind of corruption. You only have to take a glance on social media. This is why better communication is essential. Webb’s great mission has been to improve that, and he has generally done a better job, but it’s fair to say the response to Saturday made this worse. Liverpool were perplexed at how long it took for a statement to be made about the offside, the PGMOL eventually only commenting in the middle of Klopp’s post-game press conference. It was actually The Independent that made him aware of their statement, to the Liverpool manager's increased bemusement. The explanation that the VAR actually checked for the wrong call then came even later, as it felt like every development deepened the crisis. There are at least a number of logical steps that can be taken to address that. One of those is not to just remove VAR, since this is a non-starter that goes way beyond England and up to Fifa. It is here to stay. That’s also why it’s just vital that cases like this lead to improvement. One first step is to limit this extra work abroad – as England and Cook’s appointment in the UAE was within the rules and actually approved by the FA. Another is to improve the communication so there is absolutely no ambiguity. It is simple to go from “check complete” to “the decision should be a goal”, or equivalent. That also raises the most obvious solution of all. All of the communication between the referee and VAR should be made audible and accessible, so as to eliminate any ambiguity. People might still disagree with decisions, but they would at least be able to understand why they are made. That goes a long way to creating acceptance of VAR. When it was raised whether the audio from this decision would be made public, one response was that Match Officials Mic’d Up is now a monthly show so it will likely feature on that. The reality is that the Premier League could do with it coming out now, because of the number of questions that are being asked. Liverpool themselves called for the review to have “full transparency”. "This is vital for the reliability of future decision making as it applies to all clubs with learnings being used to make improvements to processes in order to ensure this kind of situation cannot occur again,” the club said. It doesn’t help that this comes amid even greater credibility questions for the Premier League, as everyone awaits the outcome of the charges against Manchester City and Everton over alleged Financial Fair Play breaches. Many of the sport’s “stakeholders” are now livid at this. Even for broadcasters, this affects the credibility of the product they put on television. That trust is what the game is founded on. In the meantime, Liverpool are exploring “the range of options available, given the clear need for escalation and resolution”. An apology, evidently, is not enough. Read More Every VAR apology so far: From Liverpool offside to Man City handball Liverpool to ‘explore options’ in response to ‘unacceptable’ VAR error VAR officials who made Liverpool error took charge of UAE match just 48 hours before Every VAR apology so far: From Liverpool offside to Man City handball More VAR disapproval as Nottingham Forest and Brentford both berate decisions Liverpool to ‘explore options’ in response to ‘unacceptable’ VAR error

Detroit Tigers free agent ace Eduardo Rodriguez reportedly cares not about geography, which could shake up the free agency landscape.

Leon vs. LAFC - CONCACAF Champions League final preview: TV Channel, live stream, team news & prediction.

By David Shepardson WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. auto suppliers on Tuesday urged President Joe Biden to provide federal assistance to help

ATLANTA--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct 25, 2023--

Iran has transferred five Iranian-Americans from prison to house arrest, part of a possible deal over billions of dollars of Iranian assets frozen in South Korea

The number of available jobs in the United States unexpectedly rose in April, bucking economists' predictions after a three-month stretch of declines.

Officials and activists say that rebel groups — including one with ties to the Islamic State group — killed at least 21 people in restive northeastern Congo over the weekend

Officials say three people may have died and temperature records have been broken in a Pacific Northwest heat wave

Just two weeks after fleeing his home with barely more than the clothes on his back and the phone in his pocket, 23-year-old Ashot Gabrielyan is at a tech conference promoting one of the last things he has left: his startup. He is one of more than 100,000 ethnic Armenian refugees who were forced out of Nagorno-Karabakh in late September when Azerbaijani forces retook control of the breakaway enclave. Alongside his two brothers – who evacuated in a single car with their parents and a grandparent on 28 September – Gabrielyan is now attempting to start a new life from temporary accommodation in Armenia’s capital of Yerevan. “We lost our property, but we also lost ourselves,” he says. “We have lost our previous lives. We are starting everything from scratch.” His online marketing startup, Brothers in Business (BIB), was offered a last-minute stand at the DigiTec Expo, with organisers hoping that technology will help offer a solution for the country. As a landlocked nation lacking the natural resources of its historically hostile neighbours, Armenia’s nascent tech industry is seen as a way to achieve sovereignty and future stability in the long term, while also assisting with the humanitarian crisis in the short term. The country was once a tech hub in the region – one of the world’s first computers was built in Armenia – but much of Armenia’s talent left following the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. A new scene emerged when émigrés returned to the country after finding success in Silicon Valley, establishing the country’s internet network and providing a foundation for startups to emerge. There are now an estimated 300 pre-seed-stage startups in Armenia, and around 100 seed-stage startups, in fields ranging from quantum computing to electric bikes. “We have this vision: Tech is the ultimate direction that will help Armenia to succeed,” says Narek Vardanyan, CEO of Prelaunch.com, whose company acts as a platform to help local startups establish themselves on the market. “We are landlocked, we have no natural resources. All we have is talent. And our only way we can develop is technology,” he says. “We don’t have a backup plan. There is no Plan B. We are betting everything on technology.” Armenia’s most successful startup so far is Picsart, an online photo editor that has grown to become the country’s only unicorn – a company with a valuation north of $1 billion. Picsart is among those offering their resources to help refugees, fast-tracking the launch of an educational program that will be offered for free to refugees and war veterans, training and reskilling them in everything from machine learning to graphic design. Hayk Sahakyan, a creative director at Picsart, says there has been a “huge number” of people interested so far, including children. This idea of building up Armenia’s tech industry through education can be found through two privately funded initiatives that are providing free courses in STEM subjects to tens of thousands of young people throughout the country. The first is TUMO, which provides free supplemental education to 12-18 year olds in creative technologies, ranging from game development to music. Since the first TUMO centre opened in Yerevan in 2011, dozens of centres have sprung up throughout Armenia and the rest of the world, including hubs in Berlin, Paris and Los Angeles. One of its six core centres and three smaller “Box” centres had to be abandoned during the Azerbaijani offensive in Nagorno-Karabakh last month. “External circumstances can literally kill us. But whenever anyone asks me whether Armenia has a future, it’s here,” says Zara Budaghyan, head of communications at TUMO. “Technology has the potential to provide a more stable economy, but also better lives. International support has been lacking. We need to rebuild by ourselves. We are broken. But this gives us something to believe in.” The second educational initiative is a network of technology, science and engineering laboratories set up in rural communities, offering children from 10-18 free after school classes. Established by UATE – a business association that also runs the DigiTec Expo – several of the labs in Nagorno-Karabakh also had to be shut down in September. UATE chief executive Sargis Karapetyan, who grew up in the region, says around 200 of his relatives were among the refugees. Karapetyan considered cancelling the DigiTec conference, saying there is still a deep distrust of Azerbaijan. There are fears that the annex was only part one. The next stage, which US Secretary of State Antony Blinken believes could happen “within weeks”, could be an invasion to establish a land corridor between the two parts of Azerbaijan. When asked what prompted the decision to persevere with the tech conference despite personal tragedy and the threat of further chaos, Karapetyan replies: "Technology will save the world.” Read More Students told ‘avoid all robots’ after Oregon University bomb threat prank AI being used to create child abuse imagery, watchdog warns More than 500 potential cyber attacks logged every second, BT says Students told ‘avoid all robots’ after Oregon University bomb threat prank AI being used to create child abuse imagery, watchdog warns More than 500 potential cyber attacks logged every second, BT says