Truth Pharm aims to ‘build a more just future' with new mural
Truth Pharm recently received a $2,000 grant from Ithaca Mural's Thriving Future initiative to create a mural on its building, located at 49 Pine Street in Binghamton.
The project began on Sunday, employing several staff members, volunteers, community members, and clients.
The theme of the mural is 'building a more just future.'
It features three figures that represent activism, cross-generational collaboration, and healthy living. There are also images of flowers and insects native to the local area, representing living in harmony with the environment.
Mia Hause is the Community Arts Liaison. She says Truth Pharm has wanted to create a mural for a very long time.
'It's really important for us to have a really bright and welcoming space. We don't want to feel intimidating or sterile to the folks who receive our services. We've put in a lot of effort to do that inside of our office, and now we're really excited to bring that to the neighborhood on a broader level,' said Hause.
Hause says Truth Pharm is hoping the mural also makes the building more recognizable to those seeking services.
The mural is expected to be complete by the end of next week.
There will be an unveiling ceremony during the next First Friday on June 6.
Stenger's final graduation weekend at Binghamton University
Truth Pharm aims to 'build a more just future' with new mural
Westover YMCA opens Discovery Den to unite families and members
Roberson Museum announces $12 million transformative project
Binghamton Move Out Project collects unwanted items for 8th year
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
China has reportedly told its data center operators to source more than 50% of their chips from domestic manufacturers in an effort to break away from US tech
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The Chinese government has reportedly mandated that its domestic data center operators nationwide should source more than 50 per cent of their chips from domestic producers. The mandate is said to have originated in guidelines proposed last March for the Shanghai municipality, which stipulated that 'adoption of domestic computing and storage chips at the city's intelligent computing centres should be above 50 per cent by 2025" (via the South China Morning Post). According to the SCMP, a source working as an adviser in the data center industry told the outlet that the Shanghai chip quotas for the city's data centers had since become a mandatory nationwide policy. In the great AI race, China is often viewed to be somewhat behind when it comes to computing power, despite efforts in recent years to build more than 500 new data centers across the country. Sources have told the SCMP that while Chinese chips are considered "usable" in inference training for AI models within these facilities, Nvidia chips are still the go-to choice. While the US government has recently decided to grant licenses to Nvidia to sell its H20 GPUs to the country once more, a requirement of 50% or more all-Chinese chips would likely affect potential sales—although given the rate of expansion and the apparent popularity of Nvidia hardware in the country, I'd say it was still likely to shift a fair few units to Chinese shores. The SCMP also reports that data centers are facing adaptation challenges in integrating Nvidia's hardware with domestic solutions. Nvidia's AI GPUs make use of Nvidia's CUDA software ecosystem, while Chinese models often use Huawei CANN or similar. Integrating the two together is apparently quite the technical challenge, particularly if firms wish to min/max the number of faster Nvidia chips they're allowed to use. Despite these issues, it should be noted that Chinese developers were still able to create DeepSeek's AI models under previous chip restrictions, an open-source alternative that shook the industry considerably at the start of this year. While China may be behind in the hardware game, it doesn't appear to have held it back as much as advocates for the previous US sanctions may have hoped, with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang openly praising the Chinese AI industry last month. In reference to fears of the Chinese military advancing its tech with US AI hardware, Huang said: "There's plenty of computing capacity in China already. If you just think about the number of supercomputers in China, built by amazing Chinese engineers, that are already in operation." "They don't need Nvidia's chips, certainly, or American tech stacks, in order to build their military." How much of China's current AI output is being trained and run on Chinese hardware, compared to US equivalents, is currently unclear. Still, this mandate looks to be an attempt by the Chinese government to put curbs on a potential future US tech dominance within its AI industry, and ensure that Chinese AI hardware remains at the forefront of its AI development. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Fast Company
4 hours ago
- Fast Company
The surprising power of being a generalist
I learned very early in my professional life that there are two paths to career success. Become an expert at one specific thing. Or master a few skills and leverage them simultaneously. The second option is working for me. Becoming a 'skills-powered' professional is how I can survive the future of work. The 'narrow expert' path doesn't work for everyone. New research from McKinsey shows that 44% of Americans want to switch careers, but nearly half say their biggest obstacle is a lack of skills. The biggest skills gap isn't a lack of technical knowledge; it's a lack of adaptability. Employers want people who learn fast, wear different hats, and solve cross-functional problems. In short, they want generalists. Just be enough You don't need to be everything. You just need to be enough of many things. You can't master everything. That's not the point. A generalist is strategically skilled in diverse areas. They are able to connect the dots others don't see. As David Epstein writes in his bestselling book Range, 'Modern work demands knowledge transfer — the ability to apply knowledge to new situations and domains.' To thrive in the future of work, think of yourself as a Swiss Army knife, built for the complexity of the productive environment. Skill stacking What you can do now is stack your skills. Then make them talk to each other. What makes you indispensable isn't in any one ability. It's a combination of transferable skills. Let's say you're decent at writing, coding, and psychology. Individually, none of those put you at the top. But together? You might be the professional an employer needs to design an app with a better user interface. And human behaviour knowledge is integrated into every interaction. Skill stacking can raise your market value by making you proficient (if not necessarily exceptional) in multiple areas. Make peace with not being 'the best' In any room, there's always someone who knows more about something. Becoming a generalist means focusing on what fits you. It means letting go of being 'the best' at one thing, especially when the rules keep changing. Become the most adaptable. The most curious. The most useful in unexpected ways. Employers want people with a diverse skill set who can adapt to the changing demands of work. A generalist has a beginner's mindset Every new skill you learn humbles you. It teaches you to learn faster, listen better, and synthesize across departments. Over time, you stop pursuing titles and start stacking tools that can help you become adaptable. Right now, talent is everywhere. AI can out-code us. Specialists can outshine in narrow fields. But no one else can have your exact set of skills, experiences, and insights. Your generalist path can become your defence against becoming obsolete. Don't just pursue a career. Build capability Careers are changing fast. Roles are disappearing. Even titles are evolving. But capabilities stick. Learn how to write clearly. Think critically. And present ideas. Invest in survival skills. They're what employers really want. Being good at many things, combined with the ability to switch context fast, is now a competitive edge. I'm not saying reject mastery. If something makes you come alive, by all means, hone in on it. But be open to building a bridge across many domains. You don't need to fit into one box The world of work won't stop changing. Professionals like you who adapt, connect and evolve will be ready for the uncertainties. It's how you stay useful when the rules change. The more skills you build, the more freedom you earn. Freedom to switch, lead, and secure your career. Stack your skills. You don't need to out-specialize anyone. You just need to be able to connect the dots that matter. And solve problems from multiple angles. A generalist knows how to learn, pivot, and apply knowledge across fields. Get into what excites you Become what psychologist Carl Rogers calls the 'fully functioning person.' Someone open to experience and always evolving. The best generalists are not just jacks-of-all-trades; they're masters of reinvention. Specialists see the trees. Generalists see the forest and the paths between them. You can offer both skills and perspective. That's why companies now prioritize learning ability over fixed expertise. Stay curious. Stay flexible. The future isn't about what you know. It's about how fast you can learn. Like Bruce Lee said, 'Be water, my friend.' That's how generalists win.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
OpenAI just raised another $8.3 billon in a funding round that values it at an unbelievable $300B, surpassing AMD, Coca-Cola, and General Electric
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. OpenAI's business model is, at bottom, pretty simple. Sam Altman gets up on a stage somewhere, burbles a few lines about how AI is going to radically upend society and cure cancer, and then shareholders fall over themselves in a frenzied rush to thrust money upon this economic miracle-to-be. OpenAI sells subscriptions to users, sure, but the real profit is in the promises. As reported by the New York Times' Dealbook, OpenAI has raised $8.3 billion in a new funding round that values the company at $300 billion. This news comes ahead of schedule: OpenAI's last crazy investment round was the announcement of a $30 billion deal with SoftBank, on top of which it raised another $2.5 billion from VC firms, before saying it planned to raise another $7.5 billion by the end of the year. Job done, and handsomely, with five months to go. The Dragoneer Investment Group is in there with an enormous $2.8 billion investment: even in the world of venture capital, this is an extraordinary sum for one firm to commit. The NYT's DealBook reckons it "may be one of the largest [checks] ever written" by a single investment firm. Many other firms took part in the funding round, which was apparently five times oversubscribed. OpenAI may well come up with a defining piece of technology that actually changes the world: but so far, it hasn't. Not even close. ChatGPT certainly has its uses, but… $300 billion is a valuation that reckons OpenAI (which is not yet publicly listed) is worth more than Coca-Cola ($296 billion), AMD ($278 billion) and General Electric ($285 billion). A notable element of this news was an anonymous OpenAI employee that spoke to both DealBook and CNBC, claiming that the company's annual recurring revenue has "soared" to $13 billion and they project it will top $20 billion by the end of the year. There are also apparently now five million business users. I am not sure any of these numbers should be taken at face value, nor why OpenAI staff feel the need to anonymously tell outlets that the numbers are looking great, homie. So many big tech firms are so heavily invested in AI now that there's a sense of inevitability about the tech creeping into everything. There are great use cases and not-so-great use cases (among AI's biggest crimes is making Google search useless). But all of this is predicated on a product that, as of yet, hasn't delivered on the more grandiose promises made by its backers. Maybe it will. But $300 billion seems like an awfully big bet on "maybe."
