消息人士稱，烏克蘭無人機再次襲擊俄羅斯Ust-Luga港，其石油碼頭遇襲

Recently Reuters reported the following:

Ukrainian drones strike Russia's Ust-Luga port again, sources say oil terminal hit

Reporting by Reuters. Editing by Mark Trevelyan and Mark Potter

March 30, 202610:05 PM PDTUpdated 10 hours ago

MOSCOW, March 31 (Reuters) - Ukrainian drones on Tuesday struck Russia's Baltic Sea port of ‌Ust-Luga for the fifth time in 10 days, and industry sources told Reuters an oil loading terminal was hit, likely adding to Russia's difficulties in exporting crude.

Kyiv has stepped up attacks on Russia's oil export infrastructure over the past month, ​launching its heaviest drone strikes of the more than four-year war against the Baltic ports of Ust-Luga ​and Primorsk.

At least 40% of Russia's oil export capacity has been halted due to drone ⁠attacks, a disputed strike on a major pipeline and the seizure of tankers, according to Reuters calculations ​based on market data.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy said on Monday that some of Kyiv's allies had sent "signals" about the ​possibility of scaling back its long-range strikes on Russia's oil sector as global energy prices have surged due to the Iran war.

TRANSNEFT OIL TERMINAL HIT

Regional governor Alexander Drozdenko said three people, including two children, were treated for injuries, and several buildings had ​been damaged in the overnight attacks.

In a message on Telegram at 0409 GMT, he said air-raid alerts ​in the region had been lifted but gave no details on damage to the port.

He later said that the aftermath ‌of the ⁠attack on Ust-Luga had been "eliminated" or dealt with. He said the supply of hot water and heating to residential and other units in the region were restored.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the strikes "terrorist attacks," adding that Russia was working on protecting its critical infrastructure.

"This doesn't mean these facilities can be 100% protected from ​such terrorist attacks. However, intensive ​work is being carried ⁠out, and this applies not only to the port ... but to all other critical infrastructure facilities," he told a daily conference call with reporters.

Three industry sources told ​Reuters Ukrainian drones struck crude oil loading facilities operated by Russian pipeline monopoly ​Transneft (TRNF_p.MM), opens new tab in ⁠the latest attack. Transneft did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

Ust-Luga, on the south-eastern shore of the Gulf of Finland, is a sprawling complex of oil-processing facilities and export terminals handling crude oil and oil ⁠products.

According to ​source-based data, the port exported 32.9 million metric tons of oil ​products last year. It typically handles about 700,000 barrels of crude oil per day.

Authorities say Ust-Luga was hit on March 22, 25, ​27, 29 and 31, forcing suspensions of export operations.

Translation

消息人士稱，烏克蘭無人機再次襲擊俄羅斯Ust-Luga港，其石油碼頭遇襲

莫斯科，3月31日（路透社） - 烏克蘭無人機週二第五次襲擊了俄羅斯波羅的海港口Ust-Luga，這是10天內的第五次襲擊。業內消息人士告訴路透社，一個石油裝卸碼頭遭到攻擊，可能加劇俄羅斯原油出口的困難。

過去一個月，基輔加大了對俄羅斯石油出口基礎設施的襲擊力度，對波羅的海港口Ust-Luga和Primorsk發動了這場持續四年多的戰爭中最猛烈的無人機襲擊。

路透社根據市場數據計算，由於無人機打擊，對一條主要輸油管道的爭議性襲擊，以及油輪被扣押，俄羅斯至少40%的石油出口能力已停止。

烏克蘭總統澤連斯基週一表示，由於伊朗戰爭導致全球能源價格飆升，基輔的一些盟友已發出“信號”，探索可能縮減對俄羅斯石油行業的遠程打擊的可能性。

Transneft的石油碼頭遇襲

地區行政長官Alexander Drozdenko表示，包括兩名兒童在內的三人因夜間襲擊受傷接受治療，多棟建築物受損。

他在格林威治標準時間04:09透過Telegram發布消息稱，該地區的空襲警報已解除，但沒有透露港口受損情況的細節。

他隨後表示，Ust-Luga襲擊事件所帶來的影響已「消除」或處理。他表示，該地區居民住宅和其他單位的熱水和供暖供應已恢復。

克里姆林宮發言人Dmitry Peskov稱這次襲擊為“恐怖襲擊”，並補充說，俄羅斯正在努力保護其關鍵基礎設施。

他在與記者的每日電話會議上表示:「這並不意味著這些設施可以百分之百免受此類恐怖襲擊。但是，我們正在進行密集的工作，這不僅適用於港口……也適用於所有其他關鍵基礎設施」。

三位業內人士告訴路透社，烏克蘭無人機襲擊了俄羅斯管道的壟斷企業Transneft公司（股票代碼：TRNF_p.MM）所運營的原油裝載設施，這是最近一次襲擊。Transneft公司尚未對此置評。

Ust-Luga港位於芬蘭灣東南岸，是一個龐大的石油加工設施和出口碼頭綜合體，處理原油和石油產品。

據可靠消息，該港口去年出口了3,290萬噸石油產品。該油田通常每天處理約70萬桶原油。

據當局稱，Ust-Luga分別於3月22日、25日、27日、29日和31日遭受襲擊，導致出口作業暫停。

So, Ukrainian drones have struck Russia's Baltic Sea port of ‌Ust-Luga for the fifth time in 10 days, likely adding to Russia's difficulties in exporting crude. Apparently, Ukraine has the capability to attack far way targets inside Russia.

大學畢業生為何感到被出賣（3/3）

 Recently the New York Times reported the following:

Why College Graduates Feel Betrayed (3/3)

Their anger goes far beyond the recent rise of unemployment and the looming threat of A.I.

The NYT - By Noam Scheiber

(Noam Scheiber covers white-collar workers. This article has been adapted from his forthcoming book, “Mutiny: The Rise and Revolt of the College-Educated Working Class.”)

March 27, 2026

(continued from part 2)

The Vanishing Diploma Divide?

Since President Trump’s first term, and especially since his re-election, political analysts have pointed to the gap between college-educated voters and those without degrees as one of the most significant fissures in American politics.

In 2024, Mr. Trump won non-college voters by almost 15 points, while losing the college educated by a similar margin. By contrast, non-college voters had narrowly backed a Democrat, Mr. Obama, as recently as 2012.

To explain the growing divide, commentators typically emphasize how the college educated are more liberal on social and cultural issues than those without degrees, and how these issues have played a bigger role in deciding elections over the past generation.

But that analysis tells only half the story of how American politics has shifted. Critically, it misses how the views of college-educated voters on economic questions have come to resemble those of voters without degrees.

A 2023 paper by the political scientist William Marble found that college graduates were well to the right of voters without a degree on economic issues during the 1980s and 1990s. But they began drifting leftward around 2004, and by 2020 college graduates were somewhat to the left of non-graduates on these issues.

More strikingly, the entire outlook of college graduates appears to have changed. During the Reagan and Clinton eras, many college-educated workers saw themselves as management-adjacent — ­as future executives and aspiring professionals being groomed for a life of affluence. They did not believe they had much in common with the working class. In the late 1990s, only slightly more than half supported labor unions, according to Gallup.

But by this decade, college graduates often identified more with rank-and-file workers than with employers. According to Gallup, about three-quarters of college graduates supported autoworkers and Hollywood writers in standoffs with their employers in 2023, when both groups went on strike. That matches their support for labor unions overall.

Matt Hoffman, one of the doctors who recently unionized in Minnesota (and no relation to Teddy), told me that he took his children to a United Automobile Workers picket line in 2023. “In our society, the sides are workers versus management,” he said. “I wanted them to understand that.”

In a high-wattage presidential election, when the country was primarily focused on cultural issues, college graduates and those without a degree often appeared to have little in common. But when it came to how they felt about their bosses or their bank accounts, it was suddenly harder to tell them apart. They were no longer on opposite teams.

How this will all play out is still up in the air, but Mr. Hoffman’s store in Chicago may offer an early clue. The staff was a mix of college graduates, college students and employees who didn’t aspire to a four-year degree. One employee earned a welding certificate while at Starbucks and later became an apprentice pipe fitter. But regardless of their educational backgrounds, they almost all voted to unionize the store in 2022. The final tally was 20 to 3.

Translation

大學畢業生為何感到被出賣（3/3）

他們的憤怒遠不止於近期失業率的上升和人工智能迫在眉睫的威脅

2026年3月27日

 （接第二部分）

 學歷差距正在消失？

 自從特朗普總統第一個任期以來，尤其是在他連任之後，政治分析人士一直指出，受過大學教育的選民和未受過大學教育的選民之間的差距是美國政治中最顯著的裂痕之一。

2024年，特朗普先生在未受過大學教育的選民中贏得了近15個百分點的優勢，但在受過大學教育的選民中卻以類似的差距落敗。相較之下，就近在2012年，未受過大學教育的選民也曾以微弱優勢支持民主黨候選人奧巴馬。

為了解釋這種日益擴大的分歧，評論員通常強調，受過大學教育的人在社會和文化議題上比未受過大學教育的人更屬自由派，以及這些議題怎樣在過去一代的選舉中發揮了越來越重要的作用。

但這種分析只揭示了美國政治轉變的一半真相。關鍵在於，它忽略了受過大學教育的選民在經濟議題上的觀點是如何逐漸與未受過大學教育的選民趨於一致的。

政治學家William Marble在2023年發表的一篇論文中發現，在1980年代和1990年代，大學畢業生在經濟議題上的立場明顯比未受過大學教育的選民更右傾。但從2004年左右開始，他們的立場開始左傾，到2020年，大學畢業生在這些議題上的立場已經比未受過大學教育的選民略微左傾。

更引人注目的是，大學畢業生的整體政治觀點似乎已經改變了。在列根和克林頓執政時期，許多受過大學教育的勞工認為自己與管理階層關係密切 - 他們是未來的高階主管和有抱負的專業人士，正被培養成去過富裕生活的人。他們並不認為自己與工人階級有什麼共同點。根據蓋洛普的調查，在1990年代末，只有略超過一半的人支持工會。

但到了本世紀，大學畢業生往往更認同屬一般工人而非雇主。蓋洛普的調查顯示，在2023年汽車工人和好萊塢編劇與雇主發生罷工時，約有四分之三的大學畢業生支持他們。這與他們對工會的整體支持率相符。

Matt Hoffman是最近在明尼蘇達州加入工會的醫生之一（與Teddy無關），他告訴我，2023年他帶著孩子們參加了美國汽車工人聯合會的糾察線。他說: 「在我們的社會裡，對立雙方是工人和管理階層」， 「我想讓孩子們明白這一點」。

在備受矚目的總統大選中，當全國的目光主要聚焦於文化議題時，大學畢業生和那些沒有學位的人似乎常常沒什麼共同點。但當談到他們對老闆或他們的銀行存款的看法時，突然間，他們之間的差異變得難以區分。他們不再是對立陣營。

這一切最終將如何發展，目前尚不明朗，但Hoffman先生在芝加哥的門市或許能提供一些早期線索。這家門市的員工構成複雜，既有大學畢業生，也有在校大學生，還有一些員工並不追求一個四年制大學學位。一位員工在星巴克工作期間獲得了焊接證書，後來成為了水管工學徒。但無論他們的教育背景為何，幾乎所有人都投票支持在2022年成立工會。最終的投票結果為20比3。

              So, in New York City many young college graduates supported Mamdani, the new mayor who is a self-proclaimed democratic socialist. According to some experts, the reason is that too many people graduate from college with useless degrees, sky-high debt and difficulties in owning a home. The graduates see Mamdani as a solution to their problems. It is also noted that by this decade, college graduates often identify more with rank-and-file workers than with employers. Apparently, more and more college graduates are showing support for labor unions to fight for their benefit.

大學畢業生為何感到被出賣（2/3）

Recently the New York Times reported the following;

Why College Graduates Feel Betrayed (2/3)

Their anger goes far beyond the recent rise of unemployment and the looming threat of A.I.

The NYT - By Noam Scheiber

(Noam Scheiber covers white-collar workers. This article has been adapted from his forthcoming book, “Mutiny: The Rise and Revolt of the College-Educated Working Class.”)

March 27, 2026

(continue from part 1)

The Baristas With Degrees

While this generation was focused on earning degrees, the job market was worsening — slowly at first, then all at once. According to a paper by the Berkeley economist Jesse Rothstein, recent graduates started doing significantly worse than older graduates around 2005, then fell much further behind during the Great Recession. The employment rate for recent graduates had yet to fully recover by the Covid-19 pandemic, which upended the job market all over again.

At the highest altitude, the problem was that the economy was producing more graduates but not as many of the jobs they traditionally held. Some economists argue that software had begun to eliminate jobs in fields like financial services and merchandise planning well before the rise of generative A.I.

On average, college graduates still earned a large premium over people with only a high school diploma. But the averages concealed the fact that some graduates were doing very well — like people who worked on Wall Street and in Big Tech — while many others were falling behind.

For decades, many young graduates had earned good money even if their jobs didn’t require a degree, according to researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. But many of those roles — like insurance agent and human resource worker — appeared to start paying less or disappearing in the 2000s and never recovered. A larger portion of these overqualified graduates ended up in jobs that didn’t pay well.

After earning his degree from Grinnell in 2014 and spending a year abroad on a prestigious Watson Fellowship, Mr. Hoffman became a barista at Starbucks. The idea was to buy time while he settled on a career path. (He had studied English and theater.) But seven years later, he was still at Starbucks — partly because the pandemic had delayed his professional plans. With a child on the way and money getting tight, he and his wife applied for temporary public assistance. The state rejected their application.

Mx. Burton, who in college had led a team that made a playable video game called KaiJr, struggled to find work as a designer after graduating in 2019. It turned out that designing video games, notwithstanding the university’s optimistic marketing material, was more akin to becoming a Hollywood actor than a computer programmer: The field could support only a small fraction of the millions of people eager to enter it. Mx. Burton eventually took a much more tedious job testing video games for glitches, for $15 an hour.

“My student loans were about to kick in, and I don’t have a job yet,” Mx. Burton said. “You have to not be picky anymore.”

As Ms. Barrett prepared to graduate with a degree in communications from Towson in 2018, she applied for dozens of jobs in fields like marketing and professional training at the likes of Accenture, Amazon and Stanley Black & Decker. After getting no bites, and with roughly $50,000 in debt, she went full time at the Apple Store where she had worked in college. The store often seduced college graduates with job titles like “Genius” and “Expert,” along with its generous benefits, but Ms. Barrett had still hoped for more.

Class Confidence

In his 2000 book, “Bobos in Paradise,” David Brooks identified a new upper class of bourgeois bohemians — a demographic of techies, financiers and tenured professors who had the earning power and ideology of the bourgeois but the tastes and habits of bohemians. They favored balanced budgets and free trade. They went on expensive ski vacations and kept second homes. But they decorated them with reclaimed-wood furniture and grew heirloom produce in the backyard.

By the early 2020s, young college-educated adults were in some sense the mirror image of Mr. Brooks’s Bobos. They were often bourgeois in their tastes. They cradled sleek smartphones and watched prestige TV on demand. But the previous decade and a half had bequeathed them the bank accounts — and the politics — of the proletariat.

Polling by the Pew Research Center showed that the portion of college graduates with positive views of socialism roughly doubled during the 2010s, to over 40 percent. The shift helped fuel the rise of politicians like Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — left-wing figures who built mass appeal.

The ideology of these disaffected college graduates didn’t end with economics. At the most fundamental level, their politics elevated the underdog. They were more likely than non-graduates to call out the harassers of women and gay and transgender people. They worried about racism and climate change, were growing skeptical of law enforcement and believed the Iraq war had been a mistake.

Perhaps the most visible expression of this ideology came at work, where many college graduates increasingly saw themselves as the underdog. They began to unionize at previously nonunion workplaces, like video game studios, architecture firms and banks. In 2023, hundreds of doctors in Minnesota and Wisconsin, fed up with mergers and acquisitions that had made them feel like cogs in the medical-­industrial complex, formed what was the largest union of private-sector physicians in the country.

And it was the college graduates stuck in jobs that didn’t require a degree who seemed most determined to take on their employers. College had taught them to question. It had instilled in them what the sociologist Ruth Milkman called “class confidence” — a sense of agency that comes from knowing how to work the system, a broader perspective than the day-to-day grind.

But at the cash register, with the manager looking on, they had to smile and take whatever the customer gave them.

“I have been pretty hard on myself thinking the exhaustion was just me having an attitude problem,” Mr. Hoffman wrote to a friend during his second year at Starbucks. “But there are just too many human interactions in which you aren’t recognized as a human.” He was darkly amused by a customer who, referring to the name displayed on his apron, remarked: “I didn’t know you guys had names!”

Mr. Hoffman helped organize his store in Chicago, one of more than 600 that would unionize beginning in 2021, after years of perceived indignities.

“If you’re going to be disrespected like this,” he told me, “you have to have a bigger piece of the pie.”

(to be continued in part 3)

Translation

大學畢業生為何感到被出賣（2/3）

他們的憤怒遠不止於近期失業率的上升和人工智能迫在眉睫的威脅

2026年3月27日

（接第一部分）

擁有學位的咖啡師

當這一代人專注於獲得學位時，就業市場卻在惡化 - 起初緩慢，隨後急劇惡化。根據Berkeley經濟學家Jesse Rothstein的一篇論文，新近畢業生的就業狀況從2005年左右開始明顯遜於之前畢業生，然後在經濟大衰退期間進一步落後。新近畢業生的就業率尚未完全從新冠疫情爆發後恢復，疫情再一次顛覆了就業市場。

在最高的角度來看，問題在於經濟培養了更多畢業生，但傳統上他們所從事的工作卻沒有相應增加。一些經濟學家認為，早在生成式人工智能興起之前，軟件就已經開始取代金融服務和商品規劃等領域的工作。

平均而言，大學畢業生的收入仍然比只有高中學歷的人高出許多。但平均收入掩蓋了一個事實：有些畢業生發展得非常好 - 例如在華爾街和大型科技公司工作的人 - 而許多其他畢業生則落後了。

紐約聯邦儲備銀行的研究人員指出，幾十年來，許多年輕畢業生即使從事不需要大學學位的工作也能獲得不錯的收入。但許多這類工作 - 例如保險代理人和人力資源管理員 - 在21世紀初似乎開始降薪甚至消失，而且再也沒有恢復。在這些高學歷畢業生中，很大一部分最終從事了收入不高的工作。

Hoffman先生在2014年從Grinnell學院畢業後，憑藉著名的華生獎學金 (Watson Fellowship) 在海外學習了一年。畢業後，他成為星巴克的咖啡師。他的想法是利用這段時間尋找職業方向。 （他曾學習英語和戲劇。）但七年過去了，他仍然在星巴克工作 - 部分原因是疫情打亂了他的職業規劃。由於妻子即將為人父，經濟拮据，他和妻子申請了臨時公共援助。但州政府拒絕了他們的申請。

Burton君在大學期間曾帶領團隊製作了一款名為KaiJr的可玩電子遊戲。 2019年畢業後，他卻難以找到遊戲設計師的工作。事實證明，儘管大學的宣傳資料樂觀，但遊戲設計更像是成為好萊塢演員，而不是一名程式設計師：這個領域只能容納數百萬渴望進入其中的人中的一小部分。最終，Burton君找到了一份枯燥乏味的測試遊戲是否存在漏洞的工作，時薪15美元。

Burton君說: “我的學生貸款馬上就要開始還了，但我還沒找到工作”; “你不能再挑剔了。”

當Barrett女士2018年即將從Towson大學獲得傳播學學位時，她向Accenture, Amazon  和Stanley Black & Decker等公司投遞了數十份市場營銷和職業培訓方面的工作申請。在沒有反應之後，在背負著近5萬美元債務的情況下，她回到了大學時打工的蘋果專賣店全職工作。這家店經常用“天才”、“專家”之類的職位頭銜以及優厚的福利來吸引大學畢業生，但Barrett女士仍然抱有更大的期望。

階級自信

在2000年出版的《天堂裡的波波族》一書中，David Brooks提出了一個新的資產階級之上層的波西米亞人(bohemians) - 即一群科技從業者、金融家和終身教授，他們擁有資產階級的收入和意識形態，卻有著波西米亞人的品味和習慣。他們支持預算平衡和自由貿易，去昂貴的滑雪度假，並擁有第二居所。但他們用回收的木製家具裝飾，並在後院種植傳家寶級的農作物。

到了2020年代初期，受過大學教育的年輕人在某種程度上成了Brooks先生筆下「波波族」的再現。他們的品味往往帶有資產階級色彩，他們擁有時尚的智慧型手機，也喜歡點播觀看高級電視節目。過去十五年的歲月已經把無產階級原來擁有的銀行帳戶 - 和政治權力 - 送贈給了他們。

Pew研究中心的民調顯示，2010年代，對社會主義持正面態度的大學畢業生比例幾乎翻了一番，超過40%。這一轉變助長了Bernie Sanders和Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez等左翼政治人物的崛起 - 他們贏得了廣泛的民眾支持。

這些心懷不滿的大學畢業生的意識形態並不局限於經濟領域。從根本上講，他們的政治理念是為弱勢群體發聲。與非大學​​畢業生相比，他們更傾向於譴責騷擾女性、同性戀者和跨性別者的行為。他們擔憂種族主義和氣候變化，並且對執法部門日益抱持懷疑態度。他們認為伊拉克戰爭是個錯誤。

這種意識形態最明顯的體現或許是在職場上，許多大學畢業生越來越覺得自己處於弱勢。他們開始在以前沒有工會的場所，例如電子遊戲工作室、建築事務所和銀行，組成工會。 2023年，明尼蘇達州和威斯康辛州的數百名醫生，厭倦了併購活動，因併購讓他們感覺自己只是醫療產業複合體中一顆螺絲釘，而組建了當時全美最大的私營醫生工會。

而那些困在不需要學位的工作上的大學畢業生，似乎最有決心挑戰他們的雇主。大學教會了他們質疑。向他們灌輸了社會學家Ruth Milkman所說的「階級自信」- 一種源自於懂得如何運作體制的自主感，一種超越日常瑣碎工作的更廣闊的視野。

但在收銀台之前，在經理的注視之下，他們不得不面帶微笑，接受顧客永遠是對的。

Hoffman先生在星巴克工作的第二年寫信給一位朋友說: 「我一直很自責，覺得疲憊只是因為我態度不好」。「但在太多的人際接觸中，你根本沒有被當人來看待」。一位顧客指著他圍裙上的名字說：「我都不知道你們是有名字的！」，讓他覺這略帶威脅的語氣好笑。

在經歷了多年感受到不尊重之後的Hoffman先生協助了芝加哥門市的員工組織工會。這家門市是600多家門市之一，於2021年開始組建工會。

他告訴我:“如果你將要遭受這樣的不尊重，那你就得要爭取更大的權益。”

（第三部分繼續）

Note:

1. The Thomas J. Watson Fellowship (托馬斯·J·華生獎學金) is a grant that enables graduating seniors to pursue a year of independent study outside the United States. The Fellowship provides graduates with a year to "explore with thoroughness a particular interest, test their aspirations and abilities, view their lives and American society in greater perspective and, concomitantly, develop a more informed sense of international concern." (Wikipedia)

2. Bobos in Paradise 《天堂裡的波波族》is a book written by David Brooks that explores the rise of the “bourgeois bohemians” class. It analyzes how this new class shapes culture, work, and consumption, revealing tensions between idealism and materialism in modern society while offering sharp, witty social commentary. The word bobo, Brooks' most famously used term, is an abbreviated form of the words bourgeois and bohemian, suggesting a fusion of two distinct social classes (the counter-cultural, hedonistic and artistic bohemian, and the white collar, capitalist bourgeois). (ChatGPT)

3. “Bohemians” (波希米亞人), in terms of cultural or lifestyle meaning, are those people who live an unconventional, artistic, or free-spirited lifestyle. Often associated with artists, writers, musicians, and creatives. They treasure creativity, individuality, and freedom over wealth or social norms. Historically linked to communities in cities like Paris in the 1800s. Example of Bohemians are someone who travels, makes art, and rejects a typical 9–5 lifestyle. (Chat GPT)

大學畢業生為何感到被出賣（1/3）

Recently the New York Times reported the following:

Why College Graduates Feel Betrayed (1/3)

Their anger goes far beyond the recent rise of unemployment and the looming threat of A.I.

The NYT - By Noam Scheiber

(Noam Scheiber covers white-collar workers. This article has been adapted from his forthcoming book, “Mutiny: The Rise and Revolt of the College-Educated Working Class.”)

March 27, 2026

Political observers on the left and right had very different views on whether Zohran Mamdani would be a good mayor of New York City. But one thing they agreed on was why so many young college graduates supported the self-proclaimed democratic socialist.

As Peter Thiel, the venture capitalist and Trump backer, put it in an interview with The Free Press after last fall’s election: Too many people graduate from college with useless degrees, sky-high debt and long odds of owning a home. The graduates saw Mamdani as a solution to these problems. “If you proletarianize the young people,” Mr. Thiel said, “you shouldn’t be surprised if they eventually become communist.”

He’s not wrong, at least about the economic challenges facing recent college graduates. Student debt has escalated over the past few decades, while housing is increasingly inaccessible for young Americans, especially in high-priced areas like New York and San Francisco.

Perhaps most alarmingly, recent college graduates are having a harder time finding work. Between 1990 and 2018, it was almost unheard-of for the unemployment rate of recent college graduates to exceed the country’s overall rate. But that has been the case for five straight years now.

It appears that the white-collar job market will continue to soften this year. And almost all of these problems precede the impact of artificial intelligence, which is still in the early stages of cannibalizing human labor.

As a result, poll after poll shows that college graduates are unusually dour. In surveys by the University of Michigan dating back to the 1960s, the college educated had never been more downbeat about economic conditions than over the past four years. Gallup recently found that the portion of college graduates who thought it was a good time to find a “quality job” was a mere 19 percent, down from over 70 percent in 2022.

Of course, the economic turmoil of the last decade or two has taken a toll on millions of Americans. Most of them lacked degrees, and many fared even worse financially than the college educated.

But for young college graduates, extended bouts of unemployment, or long periods stuck in a low-paying job that didn’t make use of their degrees, upended the entire picture of adulthood they had been taught to expect. In effect, a gap has opened up between the life that many graduates believed they had been promised and their actual prospects. And they’re seething about it.

The College Admissions Arms Race

For people in their 20s and early 30s, those expectations were forged as early as elementary school, when “college for all” became a national obsession — the way every American could achieve middle-class affluence.

One of the country’s largest charter school networks, KIPP, helped popularize the mantra “College starts in kindergarten” after it was founded in 1994, not long before this cohort was in fact entering kindergarten.

Presidents reminded families that “the return on a college investment” was nearly double that of the stock market (Bill Clinton) and that college was no longer a luxury but an “economic imperative” (Barack Obama).

With an eye toward future college enrollment, students slogged through longer school days and labored over more homework. One scholar found that the average amount of time that younger children in elementary school spent studying at home increased roughly threefold between 1981 and 2003.

In high school, when it was time for actual college prep, as opposed to just the preparation for the prep, they stuffed their résumés full of university-level classes. The number of students taking Advanced Placement courses grew tenfold from the 1980s to the early 2010s, as the author Malcolm Harris has noted. At Edina High School, in an upper-middle-class suburb of Minneapolis, the now-34-year-old Teddy Hoffman took more than half a dozen A.P. classes before being admitted to Grinnell College in Iowa. It was a fairly common course load for someone who aspired to attend a competitive college.

And it wasn’t just affluent white students who became foot soldiers in the college admissions arms race. At the Baltimore County high school that Chaya Barrett, now 32, attended, students were tracked into classes where they studied vocabulary words and took practice SATs so that no manner of test question would faze them.

 “It was: ‘We want you to get to college,’” said Ms. Barrett, who later graduated from Towson University in Maryland. “‘We’re a mostly Black school. And we have high college acceptance rates, and we want to keep that up.’”

In this relentless race to the college quad, money was no object. Dylan Burton, who uses gender-neutral pronouns, already had a lot of college credit when they enrolled in the video game design program at the University of Texas at Dallas in 2017. It would still cost them nearly $70,000 over two and a half years to earn their bachelor’s degree, after room and board. But they had wanted to make video games since childhood, and the industry was exploding in popularity and revenue.

So millions of people like Mr. Hoffman and Ms. Barrett and Mx. Burton applied for scholarships and part-time jobs, and took out loans to cover the difference. Mx. Burton borrowed the full amount. For several years these students juggled finals and term papers and the night shift at the dining hall or the weekend shift at the mall.

And then, once they graduated, many found themselves with tens of thousands of dollars in loans, and no path to a job in line with their credentials.

(to be continued by part 2)

Translation

大學畢業生為何感到被出賣（1/3）

他們的憤怒遠不止於近期失業率的上升和人工智能迫在眉睫的威脅

左翼和右翼的政治觀察家對於Zohran Mamdani是否能勝任紐約市長一職持有截然不同的看法。但他們一致認同的是，為什麼這麼多年輕的大學畢業生支持這位自稱為民主社會主義者的人。

正如創投家、特朗普的支持者Peter Thiel在去年秋季大選後接受《自由報》採訪時所說：太多人大學畢業後拿著毫無用處的學位，背負著巨額債務，而且幾乎沒有機會擁有自己的房子。畢業生們把Mamdani視為解決這些問題的方案。Mamdani先生說 “如果你把年輕人無產階級化” ， “他們最終變成共產主義者，你也不應該感到驚訝。”

至少在新近大學畢業生面臨的經濟挑戰方面，他的說法不無道理。在過去幾十年裡，學生債務不斷攀升，而住房對美國年輕人來說也越來越難以負擔，尤其是在紐約和舊金山等高房價地區。

或許最令人擔憂的是，新近大學畢業生找工作越來越難。 1990年至2018年間，新近大學畢業生的失業率幾乎從未超過全國平均失業率。但這超過情況已經連續五年出現了。

看來，今年白領就業市場也將持續疲軟。而且，幾乎所有這些問題都發生在人工智能的影響之前，人工智能目前仍處於蠶食人類勞動力的早期階段。

因此，一項又一項的民調顯示，大學畢業生異常沮喪。密西根大學自上世紀60年代以來進行的調查顯示，受過大學教育的人對經濟情勢的悲觀情緒從未像過去四年那樣高漲。蓋洛普最近的調查發現，認為現在是找到「好工作」的好時機的大學畢業生僅佔19%，遠低於2022年的70%以上。

當然，過去一二十年的經濟動盪給數百萬美國人帶來了沉重打擊。他們中的大多數人沒有大學學位，許多人的經濟狀況甚至比受過大學教育的人還要糟糕。

但對於年輕的大學畢業生來說，長期失業或長期從事低薪且無法發揮其專業技能的工作，徹底顛覆了他們原本對成年生活的預期。事實上，許多畢業生曾經憧憬的生活與現實之間出現了巨大的鴻溝。他們對此感到憤怒不已。

爭取大學錄取的軍備競賽

對二、三十歲的年輕人來說，這憧憬早在小學時期就已經形成。 當「全民上大學」成為一種全國性的執着 - 這是每個美國人實現中產階級富裕的途徑。

該國最大的特許學校網絡之一 KIPP，在 1994 年成立後，幫助推廣「大學從幼稚園開始」的口號，不久之後，這群體實際上就進入了幼稚園。

總統們不斷提醒家長，「大學投資的回報」幾乎是股市的兩倍（克林頓），而大學不再是奢侈品，而是「經濟必需品」（奧巴馬）。

為了將來能上大學，學生們每天上課時間更長，作業也更多。一位學者發現，1981年至2003年間，小學生在家學習的平均時間增加了近三倍。

到了高中，為考入大學做準備真正開始, 而非只為考入大學的預科做準備，他們在履歷上大量堆滿了已讀了的大學水平課程。正如作家Malcolm Harris所指出的，從20世紀80年代到21世紀10年代初，選修大學先修課程（AP課程）的學生人數增加了十倍。現年34歲的Teddy Hoffman就讀於明尼阿波利斯郊區中上階層的Edina高中，在被愛荷華州的Grinnell學院錄取之前，他選修了六門以上的AP課程。對於渴望進入競爭激烈的大學的學生來說，這樣的課程量安排相當普遍。

而且，並非只有富裕的白人學生才會成為這場大學錄取軍備競賽的參戰的士兵。現年32歲的Chaya Barrett曾就讀於Baltimore縣的一所高中。在那裡，學生們被分班學習詞彙，並進行SAT模擬考試，以確保任何考題都難不倒他們。

後來畢業於馬裡蘭州的Towson大學的Barrett女士說道:「學校的口號是：『我們希望你們都能上大學』」 ;「『我們是一所黑人學生佔多數的學校。我們的大學錄取率很高，我們希望保持這個優勢』 」。

在這場衝向大學校園的殘酷競爭中，金錢不被計較。使用中性代名的Dylan Burton君在2017年進入Texas大學達拉斯分校的電子遊戲設計專業學習時，已經積累了相當多的大學學分。即便如此，扣除食宿費用後，他們仍需花費近7萬美元，歷時兩年半才能獲得學士學位。他們從小就夢想製作電子遊戲，而當時該行業的受歡迎程度和收入都呈爆炸式增長。

因此，有像Hoffman先生、Barrett女士和Burton君這樣的數百萬學生去申請獎學金、兼職工作，並去貸款來應付其餘的開支。Burton君甚至貸款支付了全部費用。在接下來的幾年裡，這些學生一邊忙於期末考、學期論文，一邊還要在食堂當夜班或在商場當週末班。

畢業後，許多人發現自己背負著數萬美元的貸款，卻找不到與自身資歷相符的工作。

（見第二部分繼續）

一位曾指導中國孩子如何成功的網紅猝然離世

Recently the New York Times reported the following:

(Source: The NYT)

The Sudden Death of a Man Who Told Chinese Kids How to Succeed

The influencer Zhang Xuefeng was known for no-nonsense, some said cynical, advice about how to win in China’s educational rat race. He died at 41.

The NYT - By Vivian Wang - Vivian Wang is a China correspondent based in Beijing, where she writes about how the country’s global rise and ambitions are shaping the daily lives of its people.

March 26, 2026

Updated 9:01 a.m. ET

Any Chinese parent or student fixated on education — so, basically, most Chinese parents and students — knew the name Zhang Xuefeng. As China’s most famous education influencer, Mr. Zhang was known for dispensing ruthlessly blunt advice about how to maximize a student’s chances at success.

The liberal arts? Only good for service jobs, he declared. Finance? Don’t bother unless your family has connections. Fast-talking and sharp-tongued, to his detractors he was cynical and utilitarian. But to his tens of millions of fans, he embodied a rare willingness to acknowledge the harsh realities facing less privileged students, especially in the face of steep inequality and a slowing economy.

So when Mr. Zhang suddenly died on Tuesday at age 41, of cardiac arrest, it prompted an outpouring — not only of shock, but also of reflection.

On social media, people asked: Had he steered young Chinese to better lives or discouraged their idealism? What did his abrupt death, after he had long complained of being exhausted and overworked, say about China’s hypercompetitive work culture? And if life was so unpredictable, did planning so carefully — for success that seemed increasingly out of reach — even matter?

“Zhang Xuefeng’s lesson to lost young people: Enjoy your life,” was one of the top hashtags on Chinese social media on Wednesday, where news of Mr. Zhang’s death dominated discussion. “Excessive self-discipline” was another, a response to state media reports that Mr. Zhang had collapsed after going for a run in Suzhou, the city in eastern China where he lived.

Another popular education influencer, Zhu Wei, posted a long tribute online, praising Mr. Zhang’s vigor and sincerity. Mr. Zhu urged his own students to slow down in their pursuit of test scores and jobs.

“But I also know, what’s the cruelest thing about the age of internet traffic? It’s that nothing lasts even a month before it’s forgotten,” Mr. Zhu wrote. “Everyone will soon go back to their usual state, endlessly striving and slogging, never able to stop.”

Mr. Zhang was born in a small town in northern China. His real name was Zhang Zibiao, though he later adopted the name Xuefeng. He tested into a middling university, where he studied water supply and drainage, for which he had little enthusiasm, according to interviews he gave. After graduation, he turned to tutoring and college counseling.

He shot to fame in 2016, for a video in which he — in what would become his signature rapid-fire, snark-infused patter — summarized China’s top 34 universities in seven minutes. He started a consulting company where he helped students choose majors, internships and careers based on cold-eyed considerations of their test scores, family backgrounds and whether they prioritized money or stability. His livestreams attracted hundreds of thousands of views, and his courses could cost thousands of dollars.

His celebrity came as much from his advice as his willingness to provoke. A comment in 2023 that parents should knock their children unconscious rather than let them study journalism, because of the weak job prospects, set off days of online debate. Critics said he misunderstood the point of education, or was suggesting that poorer students shouldn’t follow their dreams.

“I come from an ordinary family,” Mr. Zhang wrote in response. “If you come from a wealthy family, you have more choices, you can’t choose wrongly. But most families aren’t that well-off, and when choosing a major, you have to choose one that’s suitable and will put food on the table.”

For the most part, Mr. Zhang’s outsize persona fueled his popularity, and his business. The Paper, a Shanghai-based outlet, wrote in a profile of Mr. Zhang that the furor over his journalism remarks made his fans only more devoted: “The comment section is dominated by one voice: The poor need Zhang Xuefeng.”

After another controversy, Mr. Zhang started selling a T-shirt that said “I was wrong, I apologize.”

But he had recently landed in bigger trouble. In September, his social media accounts were blocked from posting or adding new followers, during a campaign by China’s cyberspace administration to erase what it called “excessively pessimistic” sentiment.

Mr. Zhang was among a list of influencers targeted, according to China’s state broadcaster, which said that he was being punished for using “vulgar language for an extended period” during a livestream.

But some observers speculated that his true offense was speaking bluntly about young people’s economic anxieties, at a time when the government has tried to hide high youth unemployment rates and accused young people of being too picky about jobs. (Others thought Mr. Zhang was being penalized for cheering on an invasion of Taiwan. The Chinese government, though it claims Taiwan, often censors what it deems overly hawkish sentiment.)

Mr. Zhang recovered his accounts a month later and returned to streaming multiple times a week. The morning he died, he did a broadcast then went for a run, as was his habit.

His death was announced by his company in a post on social media. He is survived by his wife and a daughter, according to Chinese media.

Translation

一位曾指導中國孩子如何成功的網紅猝然離世

網紅Zhang Xuefeng以其直言不諱、甚至可以說是憤世嫉俗的建議而聞名，這些建議旨在幫助學生在中國激烈的教育競爭中脫穎而出。他41歲便英年早逝。

任何關注教育的中國家長或學生 - 也就是說，基本上大多數中國家長和學生 - 都知道Zhang Xuefeng這個名字。作為中國最著名的教育網紅，Zhang先生以其毫不留情的直言不諱的建議而聞名，這些建議旨在最大限度地提高學生的成功幾率。

他宣稱，文科？只對服務業有用。金融？除非你家有人脈，否則別費勁了。他語速飛快、言語犀利，在批評者眼中，他憤世嫉俗、唯利是圖。但在數千萬粉絲眼中，他體現了一種難能可貴的坦誠，願意正視弱勢學生面臨的嚴峻現實，尤其是在貧富差距懸殊、經濟增速放緩的背景下。

因此，當Zhang先生週二因心臟驟停猝然離世，年僅41歲時，引發了軒然大波 - 不僅是震驚，更是反思。

在社交媒體上，人們紛紛發問：他究竟是引導了中國年輕人走向更美好的生活，還是扼殺了他們的理想？在他長期抱怨自己疲憊不堪、工作過度之後，他的突然離世又反映了中國競爭激烈的職場文化怎樣的現狀？如果人生如此變幻莫測，那麼為了一個似乎越來越遙不可及的成功而去作出精心規劃，還有真的意義嗎？

週三，Zhang Xuefeng先生去世的消息在中國社交媒體上引發熱議，而「Zhang Xuefeng給迷失的年輕人的忠告：享受生活」也成為熱門話題之一。 「過度自律」是另一個熱門話題，此前官方媒體報道稱，Zhang Xuefeng先生在蘇州跑步後暈倒，蘇州是他居住的中國東部城市。

另一位頗受歡迎的教育網紅Zhu Wei在網路上發表了一篇長文悼念Zhang先生，讚揚了他的活力和真誠。Zhu先生曾勸告自己的學生放慢追求考試成績和工作的腳步。

Zhu先生寫道: 「但我也知道，網路時代最殘酷的是什麼？就是沒有什麼東西能持續一個月，很快就會被遺忘」， 「大家很快又會回到老樣子，無休止地奮鬥、拼搏，永不停低」。

Zhang先生出生於中國北方的小鎮。他的真名是Zhang Zibiao，後來改名為Xuefeng。他考入了一所中等水平的大學，學習供水和排水專業，據他接受採訪時所說，他對這個專業並不感興趣。畢業後，他轉向了輔導和大學諮詢工作。

2016年，他以一段影片一炮而紅。影片中，他用標誌性的語速飛快、略帶諷刺的語調，在七分鐘內概括了中國頂尖的34所大學。他創辦了一家顧問公司，幫助學生根據考試成績、家庭背景以及他們對金錢和穩定的重視程度等因素，冷靜地選擇專業、實習和職業。他的直播吸引了數十萬觀眾，他的課程收費高達數千美元。

他的名氣不僅來自於他的建議，也來自於他敢於挑釁的言論。 2023年，他曾說過，由於新聞專業的就業前景不佳，家長應該把孩子打暈，而不是讓他們學習新聞專業。這句話引發了持續數日的網路辯論。批評者稱他誤解了教育的意義，或暗示家境貧寒的學生不應該追逐自己的夢想。

Zhang迴應道: “我來自一個普通家庭” ， “如果你家境富裕，選擇更多，就不會選錯。但大多數家庭並不富裕，選擇專業時，必須選擇一個適合自己、能養家糊口的專業。”

Zhang先生的超大個性在很大程度上助長了他的聲望和事業。上海媒體澎湃新聞在一篇關於Zhang的報道中寫道，圍繞他新聞言論的爭議反而讓他的粉絲更加忠誠： “評論區幾乎全是同一種聲音：窮人需要Zhang Xuefeng。”

在又一次爭議之後，Zhang開始銷售一款印有「我錯了，我道歉」字樣的T恤。

但他最近卻陷入了更大的麻煩。 9月，在中國網信辦開展的一場旨在清除所謂「過度悲觀」情緒的行動中，張先生的社群媒體帳號被禁止發文和增加新粉絲。

根據中國國家電視台報道，Zhang先生是此次行動中被列入目標名單的網紅之一，他被處罰的原因是直播中「長時間使用粗俗語言」。

但一些觀察家猜測，他真正的過錯在於直言不諱地談論年輕人的經濟焦慮，而當時政府正試圖掩蓋高企的青年失業率，並指責年輕人對工作過於挑剔。 （其他人則認為Zhang先生是因為鼓勵入侵台灣而受到懲罰。中國政府雖然聲稱對台灣擁有主權，但經常審查其認為過於鷹派的情緒。）

一個月後，Zhang先生取回了他的帳號，並恢復了每週多次的直播。在他去世的那天早上，他像往常一樣進行了一次直播，然後去跑步。

他的公司在社交媒體上發布消息宣佈了他的死訊。據中國媒體報道，他身後留下了妻子和一個女兒。

              So, Zhang Xuefeng, as China’s most famous education influencer, has died at 41. To his tens of millions of fans, he embodied a rare willingness to acknowledge the harsh realities facing less privileged students, especially in the face of steep inequality and a slowing economy. Apparently, with Zhang passing away, others KOLs in China will take up his role in talking about the harsh realities facing less privileged students, especially in the face of steep inequality and a slowing economy.

Note:

1. The Paper (Chinese: 澎湃新闻) is a Chinese digital newspaper owned and run by the state-owned Shanghai United Media Group.(Wikipedia)

The Physical Society of Japan Introduced Software to Detect "AI-Written Papers"

 Recently NHK news on-line reported the following;

“AIで書かれた論文” を判定するソフト 日本物理学会が導入

2026年3月25日午後5時00分

生成AI・人工知能

海外の学術誌で、AIで書かれたとみられる粗悪な論文が投稿されるケースが問題になっています。これを受けて国立情報学研究所の研究チームが科学論文がAIで書かれていないかを判定するソフトを開発し、日本物理学会が25日から導入したことが分かりました。

日本物理学会が導入したのは国立情報学研究所の越前功教授の研究チームが開発した科学論文の執筆者が人間かAIかを判定するソフトです。

越前教授によりますと、海外の学術誌などで、AIで執筆されたとみられる不正確な内容が書かれるなどした粗悪な論文が多数投稿されるケースが確認されていて、問題になっています。

開発されたソフトには、人間やAIが書いた10万本以上の論文の特徴的な文章を学習させていて、英語の科学論文では、AIかどうかを90％以上の精度で判定できるということです。

さらに、人間らしい自然な文章に書き換える「ヒューマナイザー」と呼ばれる機能を使った場合でも、見分けることができるとしています。

日本物理学会では25日からこのソフトを導入し、学会が刊行している英語の学術誌に投稿された論文などを対象に、使用するということです。

日本物理学会では、文章の推こうや校正などでのAIの使用は認めていて、まずはソフトを使って、論文にどの程度AIが使われているか実態を把握することにしています。

日本物理学会の播磨尚朝理事は「判定ソフトの導入で、査読の効率化と、不正行為への抑止力になることを期待している」と話していました。

また、ソフトを開発した越前教授は「生成AIを使った学術論文の執筆は非常に脅威になってきている。査読に活用することで健全な学術の進展につなげてほしい」と話していました。

論文でAIを利用する際のルール

論文でのAIの利用はどこまで認められているのでしょうか。

国立情報学研究所などによりますと、日本では学術論文の執筆にAIを利用する際のルールについては、各大学や研究機関、投稿先の雑誌ごとの判断に委ねられているということです。

このうち日本物理学会では、文章の推こうや校正などでAIを補助的に利用している研究者は多いと考えていて、執筆者の責任のもとに、AIを利用すること自体は制限していないとしています。

ただ、

▽論文に掲載するデータや画像について、意図しないねつ造や盗用につながるおそれのあるAIの利用や

▽論文の大部分を生成AIで執筆するなどの補助の範囲を超えている利用は認めておらず、注意を呼びかけているということです。

またAIを利用した場合には、どのように使ったかを論文に明記することも推奨しています。

日本物理学会の林青司理事は「この数年でAIが関与したと思われる論文数が急増しているというデータも報告されているほか、ペーパーミルと呼ばれる粗悪な論文を不正に大量生産する問題も海外で指摘されています。私たちも、チェックしてきましたが、それだけで今の動向に対応できるかは不安もありますので、今回のような判定ソフトに期待しています」と話していました。

Translation

The Physical Society of Japan Introduced Software to Detect "AI-Written Papers"

March 25, 2026, 5:00 PM

Generative AI/Artificial Intelligence

The submission of poorly written papers seemingly written by AI to overseas academic journals had become a problem. In response, a research team at the National Institute of Informatics developed a software to determine whether scientific papers were written by AI, and the Physical Society of Japan (日本物理学会) brought in this on March 25th.

The software introduced by the Physical Society of Japan was developed by a research team led by Professor Isao Echizen (越前功) of the National Institute of Informatics to determine whether a scientific paper was written by a human or an AI.

According to Professor Echizen, numerous poorly written papers, including those containing inaccurate content seemingly written by AI, had been submitted to overseas academic journals, and that was posing a significant problem.

The developed software was trained on characteristic sentence patterns based on over 100,000 papers written by humans and AI, and could determine whether an English scientific paper was written by AI with over 90% accuracy.

Furthermore, the software could tell a text written using a function called a "humanizer" which rewrote text into more natural-sounding human-like language.

The Physical Society of Japan would introduce this software on the 25th and use it on papers submitted to its English-language academic journals.

The Physical Society of Japan allowed the use of AI in text editing and proofreading, and would initially use the software to understand the extent to which AI was being used in papers.

Naotomo Harimam (播磨尚朝), a director of the Physical Society of Japan stated "We hope that the introduction of this adjudication software will improve the efficiency of peer review and act as a deterrent against academic misconduct."

Professor Echizen, who developed the software also stated "The writing of academic papers using generative AI is becoming a serious threat. We hope that its use in peer review will contribute to the healthy advancement of academic research."

Rules for using AI in academic papers

To what extent the use of AI is permitted in academic papers?

According to the National Institute of Informatics and other sources, in Japan, the rules regarding the use of AI in writing academic papers were left to the discretion of induvial  university, research institution, and journal to which the paper was submitted.

The Physical Society of Japan believed that many researchers used AI to assist in tasks such as text revision and proofreading, and stated that it would not restrict the use of AI itself, as long as the author was responsible for its use.

However,

- regarding data and images to be included in academic papers, the usage of AI in ways that could lead to unintended fabrication or plagiarism, or

- the usage went beyond the scope of assistance, such as writing the majority of a paper using generative AI would not be permitted. They were urging caution in these regards.

They also recommended that if AI had been used, how it was used should be clearly stated in the paper.

Seiji Hayashi (林青司), a director of the Physical Society of Japan said "Data also shows that a sharp increase in the number of papers that appear to involve AI in recent years, and in overseas, the problem of paper milling, where low-quality papers are fraudulently mass-produced, has been pointed out. We have been performing checking, but we are concerned whether that alone would be sufficient to deal with the current trends, so we have high hope for adjudication software like this."

 So, the submission of poorly written papers, seemingly written by AI, has become a problem. In response, a research team at the National Institute of Informatics has developed software to determine whether scientific papers were written by AI. Apparently, AI is affecting our daily life in many respects.

Note:

1. The National Institute of Informatics (国立情報学研究所)（NII）is a Japanese research institute located in Chiyoda, Tokyo, Japan. NII was established in April 2000 for the purpose of advancing the study of informatics. This institute also works on creating systems to facilitate the spread of scientific information to the general public. (Wikipedia)

2. A "paper mill" (ペーパーミル) is an unethical organization (paper factory) that undertakes the fabrication and ghostwriting of research papers, mass-producing and selling them. By forging scientifically unfounded papers and submitting them to academic journals, they help researchers advance their careers and pose a serious problem that undermines the credibility of the scientific community. (Google)