As cities grow and housing becomes more compact, architectural designs often prioritise maximum built-up space. While this approach accommodates urban density it also removes open areas that once enhanced comfort and well-being. Reintroducing courtyard-style designs even in smaller forms, could help restore some of the benefits that traditional homes offered. While it is understandable that a ‘typical’ aangan is not possible in apartments-open places like balconies can be a central element in these homes.
Modern architects are now realising the importance of courtyards in sustainable architecture. A small open space can enhance lighting, ventilation, and energy efficiency in the house while also providing a relaxing area. And
More importantly, it helps in reconnecting with nature and bonding the family members in today’s fast-paced life. Even in today’s modern homes and apartments, a well-designed open courtyard or skylit area can help in recreating the same warmth and functionality of this traditional element in the house.
The aangan was never just an empty space in a house; it was the heart of the house itself. As modern architecture continues to evolve revisiting such traditional concepts can help design homes that are not only stylish but also healthier and more harmonious to live in. And for those living in apartments-baconies can be left open, without grilling or glassing them up. It may seem like a useless empty space to some, but it actually is the only window that connects a home to the world.
Google has dropped a new artificial intelligence search feature that gave users crowdsourced health advice from amateurs around the world.
The company had said its launch of “What People Suggest”, which provided tips from strangers, showed “the potential of AI to transform health outcomes across the globe”.
But Google has since quietly removed the feature, according to three people familiar with the decision.
A Google spokesperson confirmed “What People Suggest” had been scrapped. The move came as part of a “broader simplification” of its search page and had nothing to do with the quality or safety of the new feature, the spokesperson said.
The revelation comes as the company faces mounting scrutiny over its use of AI to provide millions of users with health information and advice.
In January, a Guardian investigation found people were being put at risk of harm by false and misleading health information in Google AI Overviews. The AI-generated summaries are shown to 2 billion people a month, and appear above traditional search results on the world’s most visited website.
Google initially sought to downplay the Guardian’s findings. The AI Overviews that alarmed independent experts linked to reputable sources and recommended seeking expert advice, the company said.
The company had said the launch of What People Suggest tool showed ‘the potential of AI to transform health outcomes across the globe’. Photograph: Google
In March last year at an event in New York, Google said it planned to expand medical-related AI summaries in search.
The company said it was adding a new feature, “What People Suggest”, which aimed to provide users with information from people with similar lived medical experiences.
On the day of “The Check Up” event, Karen DeSalvo, then Google’s chief health officer, wrote a blog post outlining why the company was launching the new feature, and how it would help users.
“While people come to search to find reliable medical information from experts, they also value hearing from others who have similar experiences,” wrote DeSalvo. “That’s why we’re making it even easier to find this type of information on Search with a new feature labelled ‘What People Suggest’.
“Using AI, we’re able to organize different perspectives from online discussions into easy-to-understand themes, helping you quickly grasp what people are saying. For example, a person dealing with arthritis might want to know how others with this condition exercise.
“With this feature, they can quickly uncover real insights from people who also have the condition, with links to click out and learn more.”
The feature was initially made available on mobile devices in the US. Three people said “What People Suggest” had since been dropped. “It’s dead,” said one person familiar with the decision.
Get in touch
Contact Andrew Gregory about this story
If you have something to share about this story you can contact Andrew using one of the following methods:
Secure Messaging in the Guardian app
The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said.
If you don’t already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select ‘Secure Messaging’.
SecureDrop
If you can safely use the tor network without being observed or monitored you can send messages and documents to the Guardian via our SecureDrop platform.
Finally, our guide at theguardian.com/tips lists several ways to contact us securely, and discusses the pros and cons of each.
A Google spokesperson said: “This feature was turned down months ago as part of a broader simplification of the search results page, which we shared publicly.”
When the Guardian asked where the news was “shared publicly”, the spokesperson pointed to a blog post from November last year written by John Mueller, a search advocate at Google Switzerland. The post makes no mention of “What People Suggest”.
Asked whether safety was a factor in the decision to scrap “What People Suggest”, the spokesperson said: “It had nothing to do with the quality or safety of the feature, and we continue to help people find reliable health information from a range of sources, including forums with first-person perspectives that people find incredibly useful.”
Google’s next “The Check Up” event is on Tuesday. Chief health officer Michael Howell and other company staff will “share how we’re bringing together new AI research, technological innovations and partnerships to help address some of the world’s most pressing health challenges”.
It was March 2016, and at the Four Seasons Hotel in Seoul, the world was gathered to watch the culmination of a battle 2,500 years in the making. On one side was the South Korean Lee Se-dol, the second-highest ranking Go player in the world. On the other was AlphaGo – a computer program developed by London-based artificial intelligence research company DeepMind.
“Chess is the greatest game mankind has invented,” game designer Alex Randolph once said. “Go is the greatest game mankind has discovered.” Something about the ancient Chinese duel, where players place stones on a grid, trying to capture territory, feels fundamental – inevitable, even. Chess had fallen to the robots nearly 20 years earlier, when DeepBlue beat Kasparov, but Go, with its vast decision space (there are far more legal board positions than atoms in the observable universe) remained a plucky holdout.
Over five matches, watched by more than 200 million people globally, DeepMind won four games to one. After his third loss, Lee Se-dol apologised: “I, Lee Se-dol, lost, but mankind did not.” The real winner was DeepMind and its CEO, Demis Hassabis.
The Infinity Machine is a detailed account of Hassabis’s journey from chess prodigy to the driving force behind a global leader in AI technology. Parts of this journey are rather remarkable. His Chinese Singaporean mother, we are told, “grew up in absolute poverty”, spending part of her childhood as an orphan on the streets of Singapore, while his Greek Cypriot father had dreams of music stardom and “sold toys out of the back of a beaten-up red Volkswagen van”.
Hassabis was unusually bright from an early age. He started playing chess – and beating adults – at four. By five, he was competing in tournaments, sitting on a phone book on top of two stacked chairs so he could see the table. By nine, he was captain of the England under-11 team. By 13, he had achieved the rank of chess master and was the second-strongest player in his age group globally.
It was an intensely pressured environment – wooden boards were placed under the tables “to prevent players from kicking each other”. If Hassabis lost, his dad frequently “went mental”, screaming at him, and when he counselled him to “do his best”, Hassabis took it literally; the only way he’d know he’d succeeded was if he exerted himself to near-collapse – “basically if I pushed myself to the point just before death”.
After a stint at Bullfrog games, working on the wildly successful Theme Park under designer Peter Molyneux, Hassabis studied at Cambridge, founded his own game studio, then returned to academia to complete a PhD in neuroscience. In 2010, along with his friend Mustafa Suleyman and Shane Legg, whom he met as a postdoc, he founded DeepMind.
DeepMind’s precise mission shifted depending on who they were pitching to. Soon, they got an audience with Peter Thiel, cofounder of PayPal and the governmental and military surveillance company Palantir, who hooked them up with investment. Thiel went on to become a Maga eminence grise who oversaw JD Vance’s ascent to power and now tours the podcast circuit explaining that big tech is the only way to combat the rise of the antichrist.
Thiel’s views look positively pedestrian in the weird, feverish bubble of tech finance, especially among those lured by the carrot Hassabis was dangling – AGI, or Artificial General Intelligence, an ability to meet or beat human performance across every major cognitive domain. “It’s really finding God’s algorithm,” said one investor.
This world of hype and speculation is both fascinating and horrifying, but unfortunately, Mallaby appears unwilling or unable to engage critically with his interviewees’ claims. “Artificial intelligence,” he writes, “heralds a transformation more profound than anything since Homo sapiens acquired the capacity for abstract thought.” No it doesn’t, Sebastian. More profound than agriculture? More profound than language?
Certainly, people such as OpenAI CEO Sam Altman – who appears largely in this book as a cynical and cavalier wrecker, stealing DeepMind’s thunder by releasing ChatGPT before anyone else was ready – would like us to believe we’re on the verge of something unimaginably consequential. How else can they source investment to build more loss-making, drought-causing, energy-hungry datacentres? The Singularity is just over the next hill.Mallaby’s prose is tortuous and intrusive throughout. No one is permitted to have merely “said” something – rather, they “confessed”, “added”, “declared”, “concluded”, “reflected”, “fretted”, “vowed earnestly”. This cavalcade of purple dialogue tags may reflect an unconscious attempt to jazz up various interviewees’ contributions, most of which, including those from the (perfectly nice-seeming) Hassabis, are rather dull.
“Doing science is, sort of, like reading the mind of God,” Hassabis tells a credulous Mallaby. “Understanding the deep mystery of the universe is my religion, kind of.” Sort of. Kind of. These hedging phrases all but give the game away, the sly hitching of the actual to the notionally adjacent but thematically sexy. It’s instructive that Hassabis began his life in computing as the protege of Molyneux, a man notorious for making big promises about the depth and innovation of upcoming titles such as Black & White (which would go on to earn the dubious accolade of “most overrated game of all time”).
Perhaps anticipating that – given the reputation of men such as Thiel and Elon Musk – the public’s thirst for tech CEO hagiography is on the wane, Mallaby reassures readers that “For every Donald Trump supporter in the tech industry … there is also a Bill Gates” – a comparison that, since the release of Gates’s email exchanges with Jeffrey Epstein, reveals rather more than Mallaby intended.
Hassabis comes across as far less objectionable than these people, but remains an underwhelming protagonist. Mallaby’s focus on interminable dinners and wrangles over management structure, while faithful to the reality of running a tech startup, chokes out Hassabis’s impressive achievements, such as receiving the Nobel prize for chemistry with John Jumper for their work adapting DeepMind to predict protein structures. This is precisely the kind of research – miles from tech-bro hype about building God or founding quasi-libertarian AI-run fiefdoms – that could actually change lives.
Sadly, Mallaby mistakes Hassabis’s intelligence in one field – computing – for general brilliance across all domains, treating his half-formed pub takes on the nature of reality and aspirations to build a Large Hadron Collider as if they were revelatory dispatches. “I am really a practical philosopher,” Hassabis tells him. “I’m not just sitting there thinking … I’m also doing experiments. Isn’t that wonderful?”
Global beauty retailer Sephora has announced it is opening two stores in Scotland this summer, with the firm saying it is bringing “double the magic to a country that has long been calling for it”.
The stores in Glasgow’s Silverburn Shopping Centre and Edinburgh’s St James Quarter will mark the company’s first foray into Scotland, some three years after it opened its first UK outlet in London.
The firm said hoardings at both sites will appear “imminently”, featuring the brand’s black-and-white stripe motif complete with “a Scottish nod”.
The Glasgow store is set to boast 5,048 square feet of retail space, while the Edinburgh outlet will measure 4,961 square feet.
Sephora said the stores will give Scots the chance to buy brands including rhode, Haus Labs and Makeup by Mario on home soil for the first time, along with Sephora UK exclusives.
Sephora UK managing director Sarah Boyd said: “The Sephora UK team and I are thrilled to finally reveal that we’re bringing our ‘temples of beauty’ to not one, but two incredible Scottish cities this summer – with fans crying out for a Scottish beauty playground.
“It has been three years since we opened our first UK store; from the very beginning we’ve been searching for the perfect locations for us to open in the region – and we are so happy to have found them in Edinburgh’s St James Quarter and Silverburn Glasgow.
“Opening in both Edinburgh and Glasgow this summer is about bringing double the energy, double the access, and double the magic to a country that has long been calling for it.
“Scotland also steps into a landmark summer, so the timing couldn’t feel more meaningful, and Sephora UK is proud to play a part in a special season that is set to make its mark in the history books.
“We know how eagerly our Scottish customers have waited while we expanded across England, Wales, and Northern Ireland, and we truly want to say thank you for your patience and loyalty.
“Now, Scotland, let’s get even more bonnie together.”
Sephora was established in Limoges, France in 1969, and has since grown to a global network of more than 3,200 physical stores, along with e-commerce and digital platforms.
The firm said the new Edinburgh and Glasgow stores will open alongside its new small-format “boutique” stores, which were recently announced to debut this summer in London.
St James Centre estate director Anne Ledgerwood described the opening of a Sephora store in the capital as a “major moment for both St James Quarter and Edinburgh’s shopping scene”.
“As one of the most influential names in global beauty, its arrival brings a new retail experience to the city and an exciting addition to St James Quarter’s growing beauty line-up,” she said.
“Sephora’s immersive concept and curated brand offer will our give customers something truly new, whether they are long-time fans or discovering the brand for the first time.”
Silverburn general manager David Pierotti said: “Sephora coming to Glasgow marks such a big moment for the city and the west of Scotland and we are so pleased to be home to its largest store in the country.
“Our commitment to delivering an award-winning, first-class retail experience for our guests is demonstrated through our diverse offering of leading names across fashion, lifestyle and beauty.
“I know our community in Glasgow will be very excited to see another globally recognised brand join us and we look forward to welcoming them to Sephora’s ‘temple of beauty’ here at Silverburn.”
Michael Voepel is a senior writer who covers the WNBA, women’s college basketball and other college sports. Voepel began covering women’s basketball in 1984, and has been with ESPN since 1996.
Multiple Authors
The UConn Huskies are the defending national champions and riding a 50-game winning streak. They have the stingiest defense in Division I, allowing just 50.4 PPG, and the second highest-scoring offense at 88.8. They’ve won 12 NCAA titles and gone to the women’s Final Four 24 times. And now they’re the No. 1 overall seed in the 2026 women’s NCAA tournament.
This marks the 10th time the Huskies head into the tournament unbeaten, though the first time since 2018 (they’re 6-3 for titles when entering with a perfect record). For the six teams that would stand in UConn’s way for a title, it will be no easy feat to hold off the Huskies.
How do you begin to contend with coach Geno Auriemma and UConn? We looked for answers, asking current and former Division I and WNBA coaches as well as analysts how they might scout and prepare for the Huskies.
These evaluators, who will remain anonymous, acknowledged the immense difficulty of defeating an ultra-confident team that is 34-0 and seeking the program’s seventh perfect season. Led by national player of the year favorite Sarah Strong and projected 2026 WNBA No. 1 draft pick Azzi Fudd, the Huskies have won by double digits in every game but one this season.
UConn hosts No. 16 seed UTSA on Saturday in the Fort Worth 1 Regional in its NCAA tournament opener. The Iowa State–Syracuse winner awaits in a potential second-round matchup. Either No. 4 seed North Carolina or No. 5 seed Maryland could await in the Sweet 16, with No. 2 seed Vanderbilt or No. 3 seed Ohio State in the Elite Eight if chalk dominates.
The winner of Fort Worth 1 plays the winner of Sacramento 4 in the Final Four, which potentially could be UConn-South Carolina, a rematch of the 2025 NCAA title game.
To snap UConn’s undefeated run will take perhaps the best performance of the season by a team. Here is what the evaluators say might help that happen, and how the teams in the Huskies’ path in the bracket could challenge them.
Don’t lose before you take the court
The Huskies’ reputation doesn’t just precede them — it fills up every arena they enter.
“They win so many games before the tip,” one evaluator said.
First-round foe UTSA, the American Conference champion, is in the NCAA tournament for just the third time, compared to UConn’s 37 appearances. But UTSA’s Karen Aston has faced the Huskies in the NCAA tournament before, back when she was Texas’ head coach in 2015 (Sweet 16 loss) and 2016 (Elite Eight loss). Aston also took Charlotte to the NCAA tournament in 2009, so she has significant postseason experience.
The Roadrunners had a program-record 26 wins last season but were upset in the league tournament and didn’t make the NCAA field. But they did it this year as a No. 6 seed in the American tournament. They are 18-15 and playing their best now.
Is it realistic to think they can challenge UConn? No — only one No. 16 seed has ever defeated a No. 1 seed in women’s NCAA tournament history. But UTSA also has nothing to lose. For UConn, the first game is just about staying healthy and playing sharp.
Stay patient with your game plan
UConn is the best defensive team in the country. They defeated opponents by an average of 38.4 PPG this season and held them to 33.3% shooting, 27.4% from 3-point range. The Huskies make foes work for every point, and it’s exhausting to face.
“Teams get used to thinking, ‘OK, we’ve got our first option and our second option — you’re not going to get those against UConn,” one evaluator said. “You have to be prepared to run through your offense and maybe get your third option. You have to set great screens and be disciplined.”
In the second round, the Huskies would face the winner of No. 8 Iowa State vs. No. 9 Syracuse. The Cyclones, who tied for seventh in the Big 12, revolve around junior center Audi Crooks (25.5 PPG), but they have struggled during stretches and enter the NCAA tournament having lost three of their last four games. Syracuse tied for fifth in the ACC and also has a strong center in Uche Izoje, the ACC freshman of the year.
UConn will make it hard for Crooks or Izoje to get the ball where they want it. That’s where patience is a must.
“You can’t just expect to get open against them,” an evaluator said. “You’re not going to get a pick-and-roll right off the bat. You’re going to have to reverse it, go high-low. If they’re overplaying, you look for backdoors. And if your offense requires a lot of ball screens, you have to know how they’re guarding them.”
“You have to enjoy it. You have to embrace it. You have to like the challenge.”
This goes hand-in-hand with patience. The Huskies show no mercy. They can stretch a lead from 5 to 15 to 25 in what seems like seconds. They will demoralize your defense. They will make your offense disappear.
“A team facing them will be like, ‘Oh, well, here they go again,'” an evaluator said. “You have to do something to slow things down. Call a timeout, although you have to use your timeouts wisely.”
Part of avoiding the panic is not letting the Huskies dictate the pace.
“I’m curious how UConn would handle consistent full-court defensive pressure, like what we see from Texas,” an evaluator said. “UConn’s quarter-court offense is so good and rhythmic; it relies on passes and cuts.
“If a team has the personnel and style to be physical — is allowed to bump cutters — and it denies passing lanes, it could be challenging for UConn.”
The Huskies wouldn’t meet fellow No. 1 seed Texas unless they play for the national championship, but in the Sweet 16, they could face No. 4 North Carolina or No. 5 Maryland. The Tar Heels were third in the ACC in points allowed (59.0) and the Terps were sixth in that category in the Big Ten.
South Carolina, which could be UConn’s national semifinal foe, allows 57.9 PPG, second in the SEC to Texas (56.6).
Avoid turnovers as much as possible
Everything about the Huskies’ offense is scary, but their transition points might be the most frightening. UConn forces 24.5 turnovers per game and scores 33.6 PPG off them.
“UConn is always really good in transition,” an evaluator said. “You have to really focus so much on taking care of the ball.”
The Huskies force turnovers in ways many other teams can’t, with their relentlessness and their ability to take away passing lanes.
“You can try to press them,” one evaluator said. “But then you have to deal with their pressure defense.”
No opposing coach knows how UConn’s defense works better than Vanderbilt’s Shea Ralph, a former star Huskies player and assistant coach. Her No. 2 seed Vanderbilt team could face UConn in the Elite Eight. The Commodores have committed an average of 13.1 turnovers per game this season, fourth in the SEC. Vandy’s turnover margin is plus-7.35, second in the SEC to Texas’ 10.62.
Make 3-pointers — a lot of them
Every evaluator we spoke with mentioned 3-pointers as critically important against the Huskies. UConn leads Division I in 3-point percentage at 39.6. Fudd is the Huskies’ most accurate from behind the arc at 44.6% (104 of 233). Strong shoots 42.7% from 3-point range (53 of 124), and Allie Ziebell 43.2% (57 of 132).
Among the other No. 1 seeds, UCLA shoots 37.5% from 3-point range, South Carolina 37.1 and Texas 33.9. The Longhorns also have the fewest 3s among the No. 1s with 146. UConn has 322, UCLA 242 and South Carolina 206.
If any team can get the upper hand on UConn — either by outshooting them from behind the arc or limiting them there — it could have a chance.
“You want to force them analytically to their weaknesses, if they have any,” an evaluator said. “Don’t let Azzi beat you from outside. Don’t let Sarah beat you. Try to make them give it up.”
It’s not impossible to defeat UConn without excelling from behind the arc, but it makes a hard task even harder. One evaluator pointed out Michigan‘s 12 3-pointers in a 72-69 loss in November, the closest any team has come to UConn this season.
“How are you going to get 3s against them?” the evaluator said. “You have to make some tough, contested shots. That’s what Michigan did.”
play
1:47
Does UCLA have toughest path to Final Four among No. 1 seeds?
Chiney Ogwumike and Rebecca Lobo break down why UCLA may have the toughest road to the Final Four among the No. 1 seeds.
Take advantage of size inside
The Huskies aren’t just a great 3-point shooting team; they are very good inside, too. But one evaluator pointed out that perhaps a team with a dominant center could pose some problems.
“UCLA may have a chance because of that 6-foot-7 inside,” the evaluator said, referring to senior center Lauren Betts. “They will have to hit from the outside, too, but I think to beat UConn it’s going to take someone who has that kind of skilled big.”
The Huskies and Bruins wouldn’t meet until the championship game this season. In last year’s national semifinals, Betts was the only Bruin who played well against the Huskies in an 85-51 loss. She had 26 points on 11-of-18 shooting.
This season, Betts was Big Ten player of the year, averaging 16.4 points and 8.6 rebounds while shooting a career-high 65.6% from the field. Her teammates have provided a lot of support, with three others averaging in double figures for a team that averages 85.1 PPG.
The bottom line: If anyone is going to defeat UConn, they need for everything to be working at its best.
“UConn usually has five people on court who can hurt you,” an evaluator said. “If you have someone on court who can’t hurt them, they know it. They’re really smart, and they’ll play off them. If one of your people isn’t being guarded, then they better be a great screener.
“Otherwise, you’re just going to start jacking up shots, and that’s it.”
US President Donald Trump on Monday criticised the US Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate his global tariffs, warning that the ruling could cost the United States trillions of dollars. He said that the verdict will benefit foreign countries and companies that have been “ripping off the United States of America” for decades.” Commenting on his tarrif approach, Trump said that he has the right to impose tariff in another form and is preparing to do so.In a series of posts on social media platform Truth Social, Trump said that tariffs were the most important issue at stake in the case and accused the court of undermining his efforts to protect the US economy. “The decision that mattered most to me was TARIFFS!” Trump wrote. “The Court knew where I stood, how badly I wanted this Victory for our Country, and instead decided to, potentially, give away Trillions of Dollars to Countries and Companies who have been taking advantage of the United States for decades.”He added, “Our Supreme Court has made these Countries very happy but, as the Court pointed out, I have the absolute right to charge TARIFFS in another form, and have already started to do so.”He also warned that the hundreds of billions of dollars some US adversaries want repaid should be seen as a symbol of what he described as years of national decline. “But, not anymore,” Trump wrote, adding that the country had “MADE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN” and would soon be “GREATER THAN EVER BEFORE.”Trump also thanked three justices: Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Brett Kavanaugh, for “for their Wisdom and Courage pertaining to the TARIFF case, and for understanding, in addition to the Law, that our “Unfriendly Competitors” should not be reimbursed and rewarded for the decades of Damage they have caused THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”The US president also used the post to criticise the broader functioning of the court. He claimed that while Democratic-appointed justices tend to vote together, “But Republicans do not do this. They openly disrespect the Presidents who nominate them to the highest position in the Land, a Justice of the United States Supreme Court, and go out of their way, with bad and wrongful rulings and intentions, to prove how “honest,” “independent,” and “legitimate” they are.“In a seperate post, Trump went on to criticise Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, accusing him of mismanaging a renovation project at the Federal Reserve complex in Washington, DC. Trump described the project as “a money pit, and embarrassment to our Country for the whole World to see,” alleging that the costs had spiralled billions of dollars over budget.He further targeted US district judge James Boasberg, accusing him of political bias and calling for him to be removed from cases involving Trump or his allies. According to Trump, Boasberg has shown “open, flagrant, and extreme partisan bias and contempt against Republicans and the Trump Administration.”He argued that the judge’s actions in matters related to Powell and other cases were driven more by politics than law. Trump said the recent tariff decision from the Supreme Court itself was an example of how the court system has become highly politicised, calling the ruling “a GIFT to Countries and Companies who have been ‘ripping off the United States of America’ for decades.”The comments come as the Trump administration ramps up efforts to recover roughly $1.6 trillion in tariff revenue after the Supreme Court struck down several of the president’s import duties, according to a report by the Associated Press.Officials are now exploring alternative legal pathways and launching new investigations in an attempt to impose replacement tariffs. The lost revenue had been expected to help offset the multi-trillion-dollar cost of planned tax cuts.Experts say recovering that amount could prove difficult, as the alternative routes for imposing tariffs involve more complex procedures and allow US companies greater scope to seek exemptions. Meanwhile, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said the administration will open investigations into 16 economies, including the European Union, to determine whether government subsidies are encouraging excessive factory capacity that harms US manufacturing. The probe will also examine China, South Korea and Japan.A second investigation will review whether dozens of countries have failed to ban goods produced with forced labour, which Washington views as an unfair trade practice. The review will cover the EU and China, as well as Mexico, Canada, Australia and Brazil.
The top of the odds board for the men’s college basketball national championship will feature several blue bloods as it heads into March Madness.
Duke is the favorite to win the NCAA tournament with +330 odds, followed closely by Michigan at +350. Arizona (+400) and Florida (+700) are the other 1-seeds, and Houston (10-1), Iowa State (15-1) and Illinois (19-1) round out the teams shorter than 20-1.
Purdue and UConn at 30-1 and 35-1, respectively, represent two of the teams receiving bigger money in the betting markets. The Boilermakers have the fifth-most handle at DraftKings and have also attracted a $100,000 wager to make the Final Four at BetMGM. The Huskies have garnered several large bets at both books, which both name them as large liabilities.
The bottom of the odds board features 14 teams at 200-1, largely comprised of the lowest seeds.
