Researchers unexpectedly discovered toxic airborne pollutants in Oklahoma. The image above depicts a field in Oklahoma. Credit: Shutterstock University of Colorado Boulder researchers made the first-ever airborne detection of Medium Chain Chlorinated Paraffins (MCCPs) in the Western Hemisphere. Sometimes, scientific research feels a lot like solving a mystery. Scientists head into the field with a clear goal and a solid hypothesis, but then the data reveals something surprising. That’s when the real detective work begins. This is exactly what happened to a team from the University of Colorado Boulder during a recent field study in rural Oklahoma. They were using a state-of-the-art instrument to track how tiny particles form and grow in the air. But instead of just collecting expected data, they uncovered something completely new: the first-ever airborne detection of Medium Chain Chlorinated Paraffins (MCCPs), a kind of toxic organic pollutant, in the Western Hemisphere. The teams findings were published in ACS Environmental Au. “It’s very exciting as a scientist to find something unexpected like this that we weren’t looking for,” said Daniel Katz, CU Boulder chemistry PhD student and lead author of the study. “We’re starting to learn more about this toxic, organic pollutant that we know is out there, and which we need to understand better.” MCCPs are currently under consideration for regulation by the Stockholm Convention, a global treaty to protect human health from long-standing and widespread chemicals. While the toxic pollutants have been measured in Antarctica and Asia, researchers haven’t been sure how to document them in the Western Hemisphere’s atmosphere until now. From Wastewater to Farmlands MCCPs are used in fluids for metal working and in the construction of PVC and textiles. They are often found in wastewater and as a result, can end up in biosolid fertilizer, also called sewage sludge, which is created when liquid is removed from wastewater in a treatment plant. In Oklahoma, researchers suspect the MCCPs they identified came from biosolid fertilizer in the fields near where they set up their instrument. “When sewage sludges are spread across the fields, those toxic compounds could be released into the air,” Katz said. “We can’t show directly that that’s happening, but we think it’s a reasonable way that they could be winding up in the air. Sewage sludge fertilizers have been shown to release similar compounds.” MCCPs little cousins, Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffins (SCCPs), are currently regulated by the Stockholm Convention, and since 2009, by the EPA here in the United States. Regulation came after studies found the toxic pollutants, which travel far and last a long time in the atmosphere, were harmful to human health. But researchers hypothesize that the regulation of SCCPs may have increased MCCPs in the environment. “We always have these unintended consequences of regulation, where you regulate something, and then there’s still a need for the products that those were in,” said Ellie Browne, CU Boulder chemistry professor, CIRES Fellow, and co-author of the study. “So they get replaced by something.” Measurement of aerosols led to a new and surprising discovery Using a nitrate chemical ionization mass spectrometer, which allows scientists to identify chemical compounds in the air, the team measured air at the agricultural site 24 hours a day for one month. As Katz cataloged the data, he documented the different isotopic patterns in the compounds. The compounds measured by the team had distinct patterns, and he noticed new patterns that he immediately identified as different from the known chemical compounds. With some additional research, he identified them as chlorinated paraffins found in MCCPs. Katz says the makeup of MCCPs are similar to PFAS, long-lasting toxic chemicals that break down slowly over time. Known as “forever chemicals,” their presence in soils recently led the Oklahoma Senate to ban biosolid fertilizer. Now that researchers know how to measure MCCPs, the next step might be to measure the pollutants at different times throughout the year to understand how levels change each season. Many unknowns surrounding MCCPs remain, and there’s much more to learn about their environmental impacts. “We identified them, but we still don’t know exactly what they do when they are in the atmosphere, and they need to be investigated further,” Katz said. “I think it’s important that we continue to have governmental agencies that are capable of evaluating the science and regulating these chemicals as necessary for public health and safety.” Reference: “Real-Time Measurements of Gas-Phase Medium-Chain Chlorinated Paraffins Reveal Daily Changes in Gas-Particle Partitioning Controlled by Ambient Temperature” by Daniel John Katz, Bri Dobson, Mitchell Alton, Harald Stark, Douglas R. Worsnop, Manjula R. Canagaratna and Eleanor C. Browne, 5 June 2025, ACS Environmental Au. DOI: 10.1021/acsenvironau.5c00038 Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.

It’s fairly easy to block the constant, incessant advertising that appears on YouTube. Google would prefer that you don’t, or pay up (quite a lot) to make them go away. Last weekend, the company started its latest campaign to try and badger ad-block users into disabling their extensions. Since then, it looks like YouTube has escalated things and is now intentionally slowing down videos. Posters on Reddit and the Brave browser forum have observed videos being blacked out on first load, approximately for the length of pre-roll ads, with a pop-up link that directs users to the ad-blocking section of this technical support page. “Check whether your browser extensions that block ads are affecting video playback,” suggests Google. “As another option, try opening YouTube in an incognito window with all extensions disabled and check if the issue continues.” PCWorld staff has seen this in action, using uBlock Origin Lite. Google Ad-block extension developers quickly got around the pop-up issue earlier this week, with one AdGuard representative calling the process “a classic cat-and-mouse game.” But if Google wanted to instigate a more serious crackdown on users blocking ads without paying up, it could do so easily—and we’ve seen it pull this same move before. Posters on the latest issue speculate that the slowdowns might be tagged to specific Google or YouTube user accounts that were detected blocking ads previously, which would bypass any kind of interaction with a specific browser or extension. I can’t independently confirm that’s happening, but it wouldn’t surprise me. It also wouldn’t shock me if Google is seeing a larger percentage of YouTube users blocking advertising, as is the case all across the web, as the quantity of advertising rises while quality takes a nosedive. YouTube video creators are having to get, well, creative to seek alternate revenue beyond basic AdSense accounts, as sponsored videos are now constant across the platform and more channels put new videos behind paywalls on YouTube itself or via other platforms like Patreon. YouTube is attacking the issue from other angles as well. Tech-focused creators that show how to use third-party tools to block ads or download videos from the site (again, without paying the steep fees for YouTube Premium) are getting their videos taken down and their accounts flagged, for violation of the extremely vague policy around “harmful and dangerous content.” If I may editorialize a bit: Google, if you want more people to subscribe to YouTube Premium and remove advertising, you need to make it cheaper. Charging $14 per month just to get rid of ads is the same cost of a premium subscription from other sources where users can watch full movies and series. YouTube as a platform is a much lower bar and just doesn’t compete at that level. I’m not going to pay that much to get rid of ads, not when it doesn’t actually get rid of all the ads—those sponsored and subscriber-only videos are still all over the place—and the site is filling up with AI slop. “Premium Lite,” which neuters the offerings for mobile and music-focused users, doesn’t make the cut either. And to be clear, I have no problem paying for the stuff I watch. I already pay more than $15 a month to support the individual YouTube channels I enjoy, like Second Wind, Drawfee, and several tech podcasts. But I do it via Patreon because sending that money through YouTube feels gross. If Google wants people to pay up, it needs to lower the price enough so that it’s no longer worth the hassle of blocking them. It’s a lesson that the music, movie, and game industries learned a long time ago as they fought the initial wave of internet piracy… and now seem to be forgetting again.

submitted by /u/upyoars [link] [comments]

This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback. President Donald Trump signed an executive order (EO) Friday that scratched or revised several of his Democratic predecessors’ major cybersecurity initiatives. “Just days before President Trump took office, the Biden Administration attempted to sneak problematic and distracting issues into cybersecurity policy,” the White House said in a fact sheet about Trump’s new directive, referring to projects that Biden launched with his Jan. 15 executive order. Trump’s new EO eliminates those projects, which would have required software vendors to prove their compliance with new federal security standards, prioritized research and testing of artificial intelligence for cyber defense and accelerated the rollout of encryption that withstands the future code-cracking powers of quantum computers. “President Trump has made it clear that this Administration will do what it takes to make America cyber secure,” the White House said in its fact sheet, “including focusing relentlessly on technical and organizational professionalism to improve the security and resilience of the nation’s information systems and networks.” Major cyber regulation shift Trump’s elimination of Biden’s software security requirements for federal contractors represents a significant government reversal on cyber regulation. Following years of major cyberattacks linked to insecure software, the Biden administration sought to use federal procurement power to improve the software industry’s practices. That effort began with Biden’s 2021 cyber order and gained strength in 2024, and then Biden officials tried to add teeth to the initiative before leaving office in January. But as it eliminated that project on Friday, the Trump administration castigated Biden’s efforts as “imposing unproven and burdensome software accounting processes that prioritized compliance checklists over genuine security investments.” Trump’s order eliminates provisions from Biden’s directive that would have required federal contractors to submit “secure software development attestations,” along with technical data to back up those attestations. Also now eradicated are provisions that would have required the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to verify vendors’ attestations, required the Office of the National Cyber Director to publish the results of those reviews and encouraged ONCD to refer companies whose attestations fail a review to the Justice Department “for action as appropriate.” Trump’s order leaves in place a National Institute of Standards and Technology collaboration with industry to update NIST’s Software Software Development Framework, but it eliminates parts of Biden’s order that would have incorporated those SSDF updates into security requirements for federal vendors. In a related move, Trump eliminated provisions of his predecessor’s order that would have required NIST to “issue guidance identifying minimum cybersecurity practices” (based on a review of globally accepted standards) and required federal contractors to follow those practices. AI security cut Trump also took an axe to Biden requirements related to AI and its ability to help repel cyberattacks. He scrapped a Biden initiative to test AI’s power to “enhance cyber defense of critical infrastructure in the energy sector,” as well as one that would have directed federal research programs to prioritize topics like the security of AI-powered coding and “methods for designing secure AI systems.” The EO also killed a provision would have required the Pentagon to “use advanced AI models for cyber defense.” On quantum computing, Trump’s directive significantly pares back Biden’s attempts to accelerate the government’s adoption of post-quantum cryptography. Biden told agencies to start using quantum-resistant encryption “as soon as practicable” and to start requiring vendors to use it when technologically possible. Trump eliminated those requirements, leaving only a Biden requirement that CISA maintain “a list of product categories in which products that support post-quantum cryptography … are widely available.” Trump also eliminated instructions for the departments of State and Commerce to encourage key foreign allies and overseas industries to adopt NIST’s PQC algorithms. The EO dropped many other provisions of Biden’s January directive, including one requiring agencies to start testing phishing-resistant authentication technologies, one requiring NIST to advise other agencies on internet routing security and one requiring agencies to use strong email encryption. Trump also cut language directing the Office of Management and Budget to advise agencies on addressing risks related to IT vendor concentration. In his January order, Biden ordered agencies to explore and encourage the use of digital identity documents to prevent fraud, including in public benefits programs. Trump eliminated those initiatives, calling them “inappropriate.”  Trump also tweaked the language of Obama-era sanctions authorities targeting people involved in cyberattacks on the U.S., specifying that the Treasury Department can only sanction foreigners for these activities. The White House said Trump’s change would prevent the power’s “misuse against domestic political opponents.” Amid the whirlwind of changes, Trump left one major Biden-era cyber program intact: a Federal Communications Commission project, modeled on the Energy Star program, that will apply government seals of approval to technology products that undergo security testing by federally accredited labs. Trump preserved the language in Biden’s order that requires companies selling internet-of-things devices to the federal government to go through the FCC program by January 2027.

YouTube is adding more ads to its cheaper subscription plan just months after launching it in the United States. Earlier in 2025, YouTube revealed Premium Lite, a cheaper version of its traditional Premium service with less bells and whistles than its more expensive counterpart. While YouTube Premium completely removes ads, gives users access to YouTube Music, background play, and more, Premium Lite only removes ads when watching non-music videos. Well, subscribers of Premium Lite have reportedly been receiving emails from the Google-owned platform informing them that this is going to change and they’re going to start getting ads on even more content.Article continues after ad YouTube Premium Lite subscribers brace for ads on shorts In late May, a user on the TWiT.community forum revealed an email they received about the incoming ads. “We are writing to let you know that beginning 30 June 2025, ads may appear on Shorts, in addition to music content and when you search or browse. Most videos will continue to remain ad-free.”Article continues after ad This was backed up by the German website DeskModder, which shared an email they had received from the platform containing the same info.Article continues after ad Deskmodder/YouTube Premium Lite subscribers pay significantly less than the $13.99/month fee for the main plan, with Lite only costing $7.99 each month. For users who watch a lot of shorts, this could be a big enough change to force them to upgrade to the standard Premium offering. Meanwhile, the Google-owned platform has continued to find new ways to implement ads. In 2024, the site added ads to pause screens. Not only that, but many users have reported encountering an abundance of extreme and sexualized ads and claim the platform has refused to take action.RelatedArticle continues after ad In May, YouTube revealed plans to use AI to insert commercials when users are the most emotionally invested in a video.

For the past two years, it’s been a ghost in the machine of American tech. Between 2022 and today, a little-noticed tweak to the U.S. tax code has quietly rewired the financial logic of how American companies invest in research and development. Outside of CFO and accounting circles, almost no one knew it existed. “I work on these tax write-offs and still hadn’t heard about this,” a chief operating officer at a private-equity-backed tech company told Quartz. “It’s just been so weirdly silent.”AdvertisementStill, the delayed change to a decades-old tax provision — buried deep in the 2017 tax law — has contributed to the loss of hundreds of thousands of high-paying, white-collar jobs. That’s the picture that emerges from a review of corporate filings, public financial data, analysis of timelines, and interviews with industry insiders. One accountant, working in-house at a tech company, described it as a “niche issue with broad impact,” echoing sentiments from venture capital investors also interviewed for this article. Some spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive political matters.Since the start of 2023, more than half-a-million tech workers have been laid off, according to industry tallies. Headlines have blamed over-hiring during the pandemic and, more recently, AI. But beneath the surface was a hidden accelerant: a change to what’s known as Section 174 that helped gut in-house software and product development teams everywhere from tech giants such as Microsoft (MSFT) and Meta (META) to much smaller, private, direct-to-consumer and other internet-first companies.Now, as a bipartisan effort to repeal the Section 174 change moves through Congress, bigger questions are surfacing: How did a single line in the tax code help trigger a tsunami of mass layoffs? And why did no one see it coming? For almost 70 years, American companies could deduct 100% of qualified research and development spending in the year they incurred the costs. Salaries, software, contractor payments — if it contributed to creating or improving a product, it came off the top of a firm’s taxable income.AdvertisementThe deduction was guaranteed by Section 174 of the IRS Code of 1954, and under the provision, R&D flourished in the U.S.Microsoft was founded in 1975. Apple (AAPL) launched its first computer in 1976. Google (GOOGL) incorporated in 1998. Facebook opened to the general public in 2006. All these companies, now among the most valuable in the world, developed their earliest products — programming tools, hardware, search engines — under a tax system that rewarded building now, not later.The subsequent rise of smartphones, cloud computing, and mobile apps also happened in an America where companies could immediately write off their investments in engineering, infrastructure, and experimentation. It was a baseline assumption — innovation and risk-taking subsidized by the tax code — that shaped how founders operated and how investors made decisions.In turn, tech companies largely built their products in the U.S. AdvertisementMicrosoft’s operating systems were coded in Washington state. Apple’s early hardware and software teams were in California. Google’s search engine was born at Stanford and scaled from Mountain View. Facebook’s entire social architecture was developed in Menlo Park. The deduction directly incentivized keeping R&D close to home, rewarding companies for investing in American workers, engineers, and infrastructure.That’s what makes the politics of Section 174 so revealing. For all the rhetoric about bringing jobs back and making things in America, the first Trump administration’s major tax bill arguably helped accomplish the opposite.When Congress passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), the signature legislative achievement of President Donald Trump’s first term, it slashed the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% — a massive revenue loss on paper for the federal government.To make the 2017 bill comply with Senate budget rules, lawmakers needed to offset the cost. So they added future tax hikes that wouldn’t kick in right away, wouldn’t provoke immediate backlash from businesses, and could, in theory, be quietly repealed later.AdvertisementThe delayed change to Section 174 — from immediate expensing of R&D to mandatory amortization, meaning that companies must spread the deduction out in smaller chunks over five or even 15-year periods — was that kind of provision. It didn’t start affecting the budget until 2022, but it helped the TCJA appear “deficit neutral” over the 10-year window used for legislative scoring.The delay wasn’t a technical necessity. It was a political tactic. Such moves are common in tax legislation. Phase-ins and delayed provisions let lawmakers game how the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) — Congress’ nonpartisan analyst of how bills impact budgets and deficits — scores legislation, pushing costs or revenue losses outside official forecasting windows.And so, on schedule in 2022, the change to Section 174 went into effect. Companies filed their 2022 tax returns under the new rules in early 2023. And suddenly, R&D wasn’t a full, immediate write-off anymore. The tax benefits of salaries for engineers, product and project managers, data scientists, and even some user experience and marketing staff — all of which had previously reduced taxable income in year one — now had to be spread out over five- or 15-year periods. To understand the impact, imagine a personal tax code change that allowed you to deduct 100% of your biggest source of expenses, and that becoming a 20% deduction. For cash-strapped companies, especially those not yet profitable, the result was a painful tax bill just as venture funding dried up and interest rates soared.AdvertisementSalesforce office buildings in San Francisco.Photo: Jason Henry/Bloomberg (Getty Images)It’s no coincidence that Meta announced its “Year of Efficiency” immediately after the Section 174 change took effect. Ditto Microsoft laying off 10,000 employees in January 2023 despite strong earnings, or Google parent Alphabet cutting 12,000 jobs around the same time.Amazon (AMZN) also laid off almost 30,000 people, with cuts focused not just on logistics but on Alexa and internal cloud tools — precisely the kinds of projects that would have once qualified as immediately deductible R&D. Salesforce (CRM) eliminated 10% of its staff, or 8,000 people, including entire product teams.In public, companies blamed bloat and AI. But inside boardrooms, spreadsheets were telling a quieter story. And MD&A notes — management’s notes on the numbers — buried deep in 10-K filings recorded the change, too. R&D had become more expensive to carry. Headcount, the leading R&D expense across the tech industry, was the easiest thing to cut.AdvertisementIn its 2023 annual report, Meta described salaries as its single biggest R&D expense. Between the first and second years that the Section 174 change began affecting tax returns, Meta cut its total workforce by almost 25%. Over the same period, Microsoft reduced its global headcount by about 7%, with cuts concentrated in product-facing, engineering-heavy roles.Smaller companies without the fortress-like balance sheets of Big Tech have arguably been hit even harder. Twilio (TWLO) slashed 22% of its workforce in 2023 alone. Shopify (SHOP) (headquartered in Canada but with much of its R&D teams in the U.S.) cut almost 30% of staff in 2022 and 2023. Coinbase (COIN) reduced headcount by 36% across a pair of brutal restructuring waves.Since going into effect, the provision has hit at the very heart of America’s economic growth engine: the tech sector.By market cap, tech giants dominate the S&P 500, with the “Magnificent 7” alone accounting for more than a third of the index’s total value. Workforce numbers tell a similar story, with tech employing millions of Americans directly and supporting the employment of tens of millions more. As measured by GDP, capital-T tech contributes about 10% of national output.AdvertisementIt’s not just that tech layoffs were large, it’s that they were massively disproportionate. Across the broader U.S. economy, job cuts hovered around in low single digits across most sectors. But in tech, entire divisions vanished, with a whopping 60% jump in layoffs between 2022 and 2023. Some cuts reflected real inefficiencies — a response to over-hiring during the zero-interest rate boom. At the same time, many of the roles eliminated were in R&D, product, and engineering, precisely the kind of functions that had once benefitted from generous tax treatment under Section 174.Throughout the 2010s, a broad swath of startups, direct-to-consumer brands, and internet-first firms — basically every company you recognize from Instagram or Facebook ads — built their growth models around a kind of engineered break-even.The tax code allowed them to spend aggressively on product and engineering, then write it all off as R&D, keeping their taxable income close to zero by design. It worked because taxable income and actual cash flow were often notGAAP accounting practices. Basically, as long as spending counted as R&D, companies could report losses to investors while owing almost nothing to the IRS.But the Section 174 change broke that model. Once those same expenses had to be spread out, or amortized, over multiple years, the tax shield vanished. Companies that were still burning cash suddenly looked profitable on paper, triggering real tax bills on imaginary gains.AdvertisementThe logic that once fueled a generation of digital-first growth collapsed overnight.So it wasn’t just tech experiencing effects. From 1954 until 2022, the U.S. tax code had encouraged businesses of all stripes to behave like tech companies. From retail to logistics, healthcare to media, if firms built internal tools, customized a software stack, or invested in business intelligence and data-driven product development, they could expense those costs. The write-off incentivized in-house builds and fast growth well outside the capital-T tech sector. This lines up with OECD research showing that immediate deductions foster innovation more than spread-out ones.And American companies ran with that logic. According to government data, U.S. businesses reported about $500 billion in R&D expenditures in 2019 alone, and almost half of that came from industries outside traditional tech. The Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates that this sector, the broader digital economy, accounts for another 10% of GDP.Add that to core tech’s contribution, and the Section 174 shift has likely touched at least 20% of the U.S. economy.AdvertisementThe result? A tax policy aimed at raising short-term revenue effectively hid a time bomb inside the growth engines of thousands of companies. And when it detonated, it kneecapped the incentive for hiring American engineers or investing in American-made tech and digital products.It made building tech companies in America look irrational on a spreadsheet.A bipartisan group of lawmakers is pushing to repeal the Section 174 change, with business groups, CFOs, crypto executives, and venture capitalists lobbying hard for retroactive relief. But the politics are messy. Fixing 174 would mean handing a tax break to the same companies many voters in both parties see as symbols of corporate excess. Any repeal would also come too late for the hundreds of thousands of workers already laid off.And of course, the losses don’t stop at Meta’s or Google’s campus gates. They ripple out. When high-paid tech workers disappear, so do the lunch orders. The house tours. The contract gigs. The spending habits that sustain entire urban economies and thousands of other jobs. Sandwich artists. Rideshare drivers. Realtors. Personal trainers. House cleaners. In tech-heavy cities, the fallout runs deep — and it’s still unfolding.AdvertisementWashington is now poised to pass a second Trump tax bill — one packed with more obscure provisions, more delayed impacts, more quiet redistribution. And it comes as analysts are only just beginning to understand the real-world effects of the last round.The Section 174 change “significantly increased the tax burden on companies investing in innovation, potentially stifling economic growth and reducing the United States’ competitiveness on the global stage,” according to the tax consulting firm KBKG. Whether the U.S. will reverse course — or simply adapt to a new normal — remains to be seen.

A Microsoft-backed AI startup that relied on hundreds of human workers posing as chatbots has collapsed into bankruptcy amid fraud allegations. ISSOUF SANOGO/AFP via Getty Images A once-hyped AI startup backed by Microsoft has filed for bankruptcy after it was revealed that its so-called artificial intelligence was actually hundreds of human workers in India pretending to be chatbots.Builder.ai, a London-based company previously valued at $1.5 billion, marketed its platform as an AI-powered solution that made building apps as simple as ordering pizza. Its virtual assistant, "Natasha," was supposed to generate software using artificial intelligence.In reality, nearly 700 engineers in India were manually coding customer requests behind the scenes, the Times of India reported.The ruse began to collapse in May when lender Viola Credit seized $37 million from the company's accounts, uncovering that Builder.ai had inflated its 2024 revenue projections by 300%. An audit revealed the company generated just $50 million in revenue, far below the $220 million it claimed to investors.A Wall Street Journal report from 2019 had already questioned Builder.ai's AI claims, and a former executive sued the company that same year for allegedly misleading investors and overstating its technical capabilities.Despite that, the company raised over $445 million from big names including Microsoft and the Qatar Investment Authority. Builder.ai's collapse has triggered a federal investigation in the U.S., with prosecutors in New York requesting financial documents and customer records.Founder Sachin Dev Duggal stepped down earlier this year and was replaced by Manpreet Ratia, who reportedly uncovered the company's internal misrepresentations.The company now owes millions to Amazon and Microsoft in cloud computing costs and has laid off around 1,000 employees. On LinkedIn, the company announced its entry into insolvency proceedings, citing "historic challenges and past decisions" that strained its finances.The fallout is seen as one of the biggest failures of the post-ChatGPT AI investment boom and has renewed scrutiny of "AI washing"—the trend of rebranding manual services as artificial intelligence to secure funding.© 2025 Latin Times. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.

This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback. Julianne Malveaux is an MIT-educated economist, author, educator and political commentator who has written extensively about the critical relationship between public policy, corporate accountability and social equity.  The rapid expansion of data centers across the U.S. is not only reshaping the digital economy but also threatening to overwhelm our energy infrastructure. These data centers aren’t just heavy on processing power — they’re heavy on our shared energy infrastructure. For Americans, this could mean serious sticker shock when it comes to their energy bills. Across the country, many households are already feeling the pinch as utilities ramp up investments in costly new infrastructure to power these data centers. With costs almost certain to rise as more data centers come online, state policymakers and energy companies must act now to protect consumers. We need new policies that ensure the cost of these projects is carried by the wealthy big tech companies that profit from them, not by regular energy consumers such as family households and small businesses. According to an analysis from consulting firm Bain & Co., data centers could require more than $2 trillion in new energy resources globally, with U.S. demand alone potentially outpacing supply in the next few years. This unprecedented growth is fueled by the expansion of generative AI, cloud computing and other tech innovations that require massive computing power. Bain’s analysis warns that, to meet this energy demand, U.S. utilities may need to boost annual generation capacity by as much as 26% by 2028 — a staggering jump compared to the 5% yearly increases of the past two decades. This poses a threat to energy affordability and reliability for millions of Americans. Bain’s research estimates that capital investments required to meet data center needs could incrementally raise consumer bills by 1% each year through 2032. That increase may seem small at first, but it can add up quickly for households already struggling with high energy prices. As utilities attempt to pay for these upgrades, the burden could fall on consumers' shoulders unless policies are enacted to make the tech companies driving this demand handle the costs. One example comes from Ohio, where the boom in data centers means central Ohio is on track to use as much power as Manhattan by 2030. There, the state's largest energy company, American Electric Power, has proposed a new rate structure for data centers that requires them to pay at least 85% of their predicted energy demand every month, even if they use less, to ensure the utility won't need to pass off costs for expanded infrastructure to consumers. States could also consider passing legislation to impose a temporary tax on new high-usage energy consumers, like data centers, cryptocurrency miners and chip manufacturing facilities. Those tax dollars could go directly into an energy relief fund, which could be used to offset increased energy costs for current consumers, either through a tax rebate or by funding the construction and maintenance of new infrastructure, so those costs aren't passed down to consumers in the first place. There's opportunity here, too, for policymakers, utilities and data centers to join forces and help drive the clean energy revolution. Policymakers could provide incentives for data centers that adopt energy-saving measures or include renewable energy sources to offset the burden on utilities and consumers. By encouraging tech companies to produce a certain percentage of their own energy on-site, states can reduce the need for costly grid expansions while promoting green energy initiatives. Tech companies have already pushed back against efforts to implement such policies, with a coalition of data center backers that includes Amazon, Microsoft and Meta claiming in Ohio that requiring them to pay higher rates is discriminatory and unprecedented, and that it could discourage future investment in Ohio. The reality, however, is that these tech companies can and should carry the burden of the new energy infrastructure they’re demanding. Amazon’s net earnings for 2023 were $30.4 billion. Microsoft brought in $72.4 billion. Meta? $39 billion. Passing on a fraction of these profits to fund the infrastructure that drives this wealth is a small price to pay to ensure fair treatment of energy consumers. The massive energy demand created by these new data centers is unprecedented. And that’s exactly why it’s important for policymakers and utilities to take action now, and set a precedent that protects average consumers by requiring tech companies to pay their fair share for the electricity they need. If left unaddressed, the unchecked growth of data centers will continue to threaten energy security and affordability for millions of Americans. States and energy companies must adopt policies to prevent the burden of rising electricity demands and prices from falling disproportionately on everyday energy consumers. By ensuring that tech companies contribute fairly to the infrastructure that sustains them, we can build a more sustainable and equitable energy future for all.

In a chilling sign of how far law enforcement surveillance has encroached on personal liberties, that a sheriff’s office in Texas searched data from more than 83,000 automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras to track down a woman suspected of self-managing an abortion. The officer searched 6,809 different camera networks maintained by surveillance tech company Flock Safety, including states where abortion access is protected by law, such as Washington and Illinois. The search record listed the reason plainly: “had an abortion, search for female.” Screenshot of data After the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision overturned Roe v. Wade, states were given sweeping authority to ban and even criminalize abortion. In Texas—where the officer who conducted this search is based—abortion is now almost entirely banned. But in Washington and Illinois, where many of the searched Flock cameras are located, abortion remains legal and protected as a fundamental right up to fetal viability. The post-Dobbs legal landscape has also opened the door for law enforcement to exploit virtually any form of data—license plates, phone records, geolocation data—to pursue individuals across state lines. has documented more than 1,800 agencies have deployed ALPRs, but at least 4,000 agencies are able to run searches through some agencies in Flock's network. Many agencies share the data freely with other agencies across the country, with little oversight, restriction, or even standards for accessing data.  While this particular data point explicitly mentioned an abortion, scores of others in the audit logs released through public records requests simply list "investigation" as the reason for the plate search, with no indication of the alleged offense. That means other searches targeting someone for abortion, or another protected right in that jurisdiction, could be effectively invisible. This case underscores our growing concern: that the mass surveillance infrastructure—originally sold as a tool to find stolen cars or missing persons—is now being used to target people seeking reproductive healthcare. This unchecked, warrant-less access that allows law enforcement to surveil across state lines blurs the line between “protection” and persecution. From Missing Cars to Monitoring Bodies EFF has long warned about the dangers of ALPRs, which scan license plates, log time and location data, and build a detailed picture of people's movements. Companies like Flock Safety and Motorola Solutions offer law enforcement agencies access to nationwide databases of these readers, and in some cases, allow them to stake out locations like abortion clinics, or create “hot lists” of license plates to track in real time. Flock's technology also allows officers to search for a vehicle based on attributes like color, make and model, even without a plate number. The threat is compounded by how investigations often begin. A report published by If/When/How on the criminalization of self-managed abortion found that about a quarter of adult cases (26%) were reported to law enforcement by acquaintances entrusted with information, such as “friends, parents, or intimate partners” and another 18% through “other” means. This means that with ALPR tech, a tip from anyone can instantly escalate into a nationwide manhunt. And as Kate Bertash of the Digital Defense Fund explained to 404 Media, anti-abortion activists have long been documenting the plates of patients and providers who visit reproductive health facilities—data that can now be easily cross-referenced with ALPR databases. The 404 Media report proves that this isn’t a hypothetical concern. In 2023, a months-long EFF investigation involving hundreds of public records requests uncovered that many California police departments were sharing records containing detailed driving profiles of local residents with out-of-state agencies, despite state laws explicitly prohibiting this. This means that even in so-called “safe” states, your data might end up helping law enforcement in Texas or Idaho prosecute you—or your doctor.  That’s why we demanded that 75 California police departments stop sharing ALPR data with anti-abortion states, an effort that has largely been successful. Surveillance and Reproductive Freedom Cannot Coexist We’ve said it before, and we’ll say it again: Lawmakers who support reproductive rights must recognize that abortion access and mass surveillance are incompatible.  The systems built to track stolen cars and issue parking tickets have become tools to enforce the most personal and politically charged laws in the country. What began as a local concern over privacy has escalated into a national civil liberties crisis. Yesterday’s license plate readers have morphed into today’s reproductive dragnet. Now, it’s time for decisive action. Our leaders must roll back the dangerous surveillance systems they've enabled. We must enact strong, enforceable state laws to limit data sharing, ensure proper oversight, and dismantle these surveillance pipelines before they become the new normal–or even just eliminate the systems altogether.

/May 30, 2025/4:28 p.m. ETTrump Attacks Harvard With Social Media Screening for All VisasThis pilot program will soon be expanded across the country.Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesThe Trump administration has begun carrying out its expanded vetting for student visa applicants, surveilling their social media accounts to make sure they aren’t posting anything in support of Palestine, which the administration considers antisemitic. This vetting will start with Harvard visa applicants but is expected to be adopted nationwide.Secretary of Stato Marco Rubio sent a cable to all U.S. embassies and consulates on Thursday ordering them to “conduct a complete screening of the online presence of any nonimmigrant visa applicant seeking to travel to Harvard University for any purpose.” That would apply not just to students but also to faculty, staff, and researchers visiting the university.The Trump administration is taking particular interest in people who have their social media accounts on “private,” an obvious, ominous crossing of boundaries.The State Department has ordered officers to examine “whether the lack of any online presence, or having social media accounts restricted to ‘private’ or with limited visibility, may be reflective of evasiveness and call into question the applicant’s credibility.”This is yet another instance of Harvard serving as a test subject for the administration’s larger crackdown on free speech and international students at American universities. Trump has already revoked billions of dollars in research funding from the Massachusetts school, and even banned it from admitting any international students at all, although the latter policy was temporarily revoked by a judge. Most Recent Post/May 30, 2025/3:53 p.m. ETStephen Miller Grilled on Musk’s Drug Use as Wife Lands New GigTrump’s chief adviser seems desperate to avoid questions on Elon Musk. Does that have anything to do with his wife’s new job? Francis Chung/Politico/Bloomberg/Getty ImagesStephen Miller had a dismissive response Friday to new reports of Elon Musk’s drug use during Trump’s campaign last year. CNN’s Pamela Brown asked the far-right Trump adviser if there was “any drug testing or requests for him to drug test when he was in the White House given the fact that he was also a contractor with the government.”  A chuckling Miller ignored the question and said, “Fortunately for you and all of the friends at CNN, you’ll have the opportunity to ask Elon all the questions you want today yourself,” before he then segued into the Trump administration’s anti-immigrant agenda. “The drugs I’m concerned about are the drugs that are coming across the border from the criminal cartels that are killing hundreds of thousands of Americans,” Miller said. Perhaps Miller laughed instead of answering because his wife, Katie Miller, has left her job as adviser and spokesperson for the Department of Government Efficiency to work full-time for Musk and his companies. Miller has probably had enough of Musk, as he has also been subtweeting the tech oligarch, trying to refute Musk’s criticisms that the Republican budget bill would raise the deficit. “The Big Beautiful Bill is NOT an annual budget bill and does not fund the departments of government. It does not finance our agencies or federal programs,” Miller said, in a long X post earlier this week. Is there bad blood between Miller and Musk that has now spiraled because Miller’s wife is working for the tech oligarch and fellow fascism enthusiast? Most Recent Post/May 30, 2025/3:19 p.m. ETOld Man Trump Repeatedly Fumbles in Weird Speech Praising Elon MuskDonald Trump couldn’t keep some of his words straight as he marked the supposed end of Elon Musk’s tenure at the White House.Kevin Dietsch/Getty ImagesHours after reports emerged Friday that Elon Musk had been under the influence of heavy drugs during his time advising the president, Musk and Donald Trump stumbled and fumbled their way through a White House press conference recognizing the end of the tech billionaire’s special government employee status.The wildly unusual joint conference featured Musk’s black eye, a giant gold key that Trump said he only gives to “very special people,” cringe-worthy regurgitations by Musk of Trump’s take on his Pulitzer Board defamation suit, and claims that Musk’s unpopular and controversial time in the White House was not quite over.But as Trump continued to praise Musk and his time atop the Department of Government Efficiency, the president’s verbal gaffes became more apparent. He claimed that DOGE had uncovered $42 million in wasteful spending, referring to expenditures related to Uganda, which Trump pronounced as “oo-ganda.” The 78-year-old also mentioned he would have Musk’s DOGE cuts “cauterized by Congress,” though he quickly corrected himself by saying they would be “affirmed by Congress,” instead. Trump’s on-camera slippage has gotten worse in recent weeks: Earlier this month, Trump dozed off while in a meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. That is despite the fact that the president received a clean bill of health in a medical report released in April that described Trump as being in “excellent health,” including neurological functioning.Musk, meanwhile, refused to acknowledge emerging reports of his alleged drug use. But the news of White House drug use under Trump’s helm is nothing new: In fact, if the reports prove true, it would be little more than a return to form. Last year, a report by the Department of Defense inspector general indicated that the West Wing operated more like a pill mill than the nation’s highest office. Common pills included modafinil, Adderall, fentanyl, morphine, and ketamine, according to the Pentagon report. But other, unlisted drugs—like Xanax—were equally easy to come by from the White House Medical Unit, according to anonymous sources that spoke to Rolling Stone.While other presidents were known to take a mix of drug cocktails to fight off back pain (like JFK) or bad moods (like Nixon), no previous administrations matched the level of debauchery of Trump’s, whose in-office pharmacists unquestioningly handed out highly addictive substances to staffers who needed pick-me-ups or energy boosts—no doctor’s exam, referral, or prescription required.“It was kind of like the Wild West. Things were pretty loose. Whatever someone needs, we were going to fill this,” another source told Rolling Stone in March 2024.Meanwhile, pharmacists described an atmosphere of fear within the West Wing, claiming they would be “fired” if they spoke out or would receive negative work assignments if they didn’t hand pills over to staffers.Read more about the press conference:Trump and Elon Musk Have Ominous Warning About Future of DOGEMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/3:00 p.m. ETElon Musk Gives Strange Excuse for Massive Black EyeMusk showed up a press conference with Donald Trump sporting a noticeable shiner.Kevin Dietsch/Getty ImagesElon Musk sported what looked like a black eye during his DOGE goodbye press conference with President Trump on Friday. When asked about it, he blamed the bruise on his 5-year-old son punching him in the face. “Mr. Musk … is your eye OK? What happened to your eye; I noticed there’s a bruise there?” one reporter finally asked near the end of the press conference.“Well, I wasn’t anywhere near France,” Musk said, in a weak attempt at a joke regarding footage of French President Emmanuel Macron’s wife slapping him in the face.“I was just horsing around with [my son] little X and said, ‘Go ’head and punch me in the face,’ and he did. Turns out even a 5-year-old punching you in the face actually does—”“That was X that did it? X could do it!” Trump chimed in. “If you knew X …”“I didn’t really feel much at the time; I guess it bruises up. But I was just messing around with the kids.”Musk chose an impeccable time to show up to a press conference with a black eye. Earlier in the day, The New York Times reported on Musk’s rampant drug use on and off the campaign trail, as the world’s richest man frequently mixed ketamine and psychedelics and kept a small box of pills, mostly containing Adderall. The shiner only adds to speculation around his personal habits.More on that Times report:Elon Musk Was on Crazy Combo of Drugs During Trump CampaignMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/2:51 p.m. ETTrump and Elon Musk Have Ominous Warning About Future of DOGEElon Musk’s time as a government employee has come to an end, but his time with Donald Trump has not.Kevin Dietsch/Getty ImagesDespite the fanfare over Elon Musk’s supposed departure from the Department of Government Efficiency, Donald Trump says that the billionaire bureaucrat isn’t really going anywhere.“Many of the DOGE people are staying behind, so they’re not leaving. And Elon’s not really leaving. He’s gonna be back and forth, I think. I have a feeling. It’s his baby, and he’s gonna be doing a lot of things,” Trump said during a press conference in the Oval Office Friday.The press conference was held to mark the end of Musk’s time as a so-called “special government employee,” a title that allowed him to bypass certain ethics requirements during his 134-day stint in Trump’s administration. The president made sure to give Musk a gaudy golden key—what it actually unlocks went totally unaddressed—to make sure he could get back into the White House. “This is not the end of DOGE, but really the beginning,” Musk said, promising that DOGE’s “influence” would “only grow stronger” over time.Earlier Friday, the billionaire bureaucrat shared a post on X asserting that the legacy of DOGE was more psychological than anything else. Surely, it will take longer than four months to forget the image of Musk running around with a chainsaw. Read more about Musk:Elon Musk Was on Crazy Combo of Drugs During Trump CampaignMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/1:21 p.m. ETDem Governor Vetoes Ban on Surprise Ambulance Bills in Shocking MoveThe bill had unanimous support in both chambers of the state legislature.Michael Ciaglo/Getty ImagesColorado’s Democratic Governor Jared Polis has vetoed a bill that would ban surprise billing by ambulance companies, over the unanimous objections of both chambers of the state legislature. Why would Polis veto a bill that’s popular with everyone, even Colorado Republicans? The governor wrote in his veto statement that drafting errors in the bill made it “unimplementable” and estimated that it would make insurance premiums go up by as much as $0.73 to $2.15 per person. “I am committed to working with proponents and sponsors to protect Coloradans from surprise bills, but I encourage all parties to work towards a more reasonable reimbursement rate that mitigates premium impacts and nets a better deal for Colorado families,” Polis wrote. In Colorado, if legislators in both chambers repass the bill with a two-thirds majority, they can override the governor’s veto, especially considering that the bill passed with the support of every single legislator. But the legislature adjourned on May 7, meaning that the bill has to be passed again when the legislature reconvenes in January.  For some reason, ending surprise ambulance billing nationally is not the slam-dunk issue it should be. Congress ended most surprise medical bills in 2020 but exempted ground ambulances from the bill. Was Polis’s veto due to badly drafted language and a (seemingly modest) price hike in insurance premiums, as he said, or was it for a different, more nefarious reason? We might not know unless and until the bill is reintroduced next year. More on surprise ambulance bills:Congress Doesn’t Care About Your Surprise Ambulance Bill Most Recent Post/May 30, 2025/12:21 p.m. ETTrump’s Pardons Since Jan 6 Spree Show an Infuriatingly Corrupt TrendSince his January 6 pardon spree, Donald Trump has tended to grant clemency a little closer to home.Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty ImagesA good chunk of the white-collar criminals pardoned by Donald Trump after his massive “Day One” pardoning spree either have a political or financial tie to him.The president has issued 60 pardons since he offered political forgiveness to some 1,600 individuals charged in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. But out of those subsequent 60 unrelated to the attack, 12 people—or roughly one in five—were already in Trump’s orbit, according to ABC News.They included several politicos, including former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, who was convicted on several counts of corruption, including for an attempt to sell Barack Obama’s Senate seat after he left the position for the White House; former Republican Representative Michael Grimm, who pleaded guilty to tax fraud; former Nevada gubernatorial candidate Michele Fiore, who allegedly stole public funds intended to commemorate a slain police officer; and former Tennessee state Senator Brian Kelsey, who pleaded guilty to campaign finance fraud in 2022.Trump also pardoned major financiers of his presidential campaigns. Trevor Milton, the founder of the Nikola electric vehicle company, donated nearly $2 million toward Trump’s 2024 campaign. Imaad Zuberi, who has donated to both parties, issued “at least $800,000 to committees associated with Trump and the Republican Party,” ABC reported.Others helped Trump advance his retribution campaign against his political enemies, or helped advance his own image in the broader Republican Party. Devon Archer and Jason Galanis, both former business partners of Hunter Biden, accused the younger Biden of leveraging his father’s name and influence in order to conduct business overseas. Archer had defrauded a Native American tribal entity, while Galanis was serving time for multiple offenses. Trump also forgave Todd and Julie Chrisley—reality TV stars known for their show Chrisley Knows Best who were sentenced to a combined 19 years on fraud and tax evasion charges—after their daughter Savannah Chrisley spoke at the 2024 Republican National Convention.Speaking to press Friday after her parents’ release, Savannah Chrisley said that the “biggest misconception right now is I either paid for a pardon or slept for a pardon—,” but she couldn’t finish her sentence before Todd interjected: “That’s something I would have done,” he said.Read who else Trump is thinking of pardoning:Trump Considering Pardons for Men Who Tried to Kill Gretchen WhitmerMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/12:04 p.m. ETTrump Knew He Was Deporting Innocent People to El Salvador All AlongMany of the people deported to El Salvador have no criminal record, and Donald Trump knew it.Michael M. Santiago/Getty ImagesDonald Trump’s administration was well aware that many of the 238 Venezuelan immigrants it shipped off to a notorious megaprison in El Salvador had no criminal records at all, according to a Friday report from ProPublica.  While Trump officials claimed that the deportees were brutal gang members and “the worst of the worst,” only 32 of the deportees had actually been convicted of crimes, and most of them were minor offenses such as traffic violations, according to data from the Department of Homeland Security reviewed by ProPublica, The Texas Tribune, and a team of journalists from Venezuelan media outlets. One of the men, 23-year-old Maikol Gabriel López Lizano, faced a misdemeanor charge after he was arrested in 2023 for riding his bike and drinking a can of beer.Little more than half of the deportees, 130 of the 238, were charged only with violating U.S. immigration laws. Twenty of them had criminal records from other countries. The U.S. government data showed that 67 individuals had pending charges, with only six being for violent crimes. In several cases, the government data about the pending charges differed from what ProPublica was able to find. In some cases, the men had actually been convicted, and in one, the charges had been dropped. But in many cases, these individuals were remanded to a foreign prison before their criminal cases were ever resolved. The Trump administration has touted allegations of gang affiliation as a justification for denying the deportees their due process rights. But none of the men’s names appeared on a list of roughly 1,400 alleged Tren de Aragua members kept by the Venezuelan government, ProPublica reported. Trump’s border czar Tom Homan tried desperately in March to downplay reporting that many of these individuals did not have criminal records. “A lot of gang members don’t have criminal histories, just like a lot of terrorists in this world, they’re not in any terrorist databases, right?” Homan said on ABC News. But the methods the government relies on to classify individuals as gang members—such as identification of gang-affiliated tattoos—have been disproven by experts. Not only were many of the men who were deported not proven gang members, they weren’t even criminals, and by denying them the right to due process, they were remanded to a foreign prison notorious for human rights abuses without ever getting to prove it. Trump has continued to pressure the Supreme Court to allow him to sidestep due process as part of his massive deportation campaign, claiming that the judiciary has no right to intrude on matters of “foreign policy.” But immigrants residing on U.S. soil—who are clearly not the bloodthirsty criminals the administration insists they are—are still subject to protections under U.S. law. Read more about the deportations:Trump Asks Supreme Court to Help Him Deport People Wherever He WantsMost Recent Post/May 30, 2025/11:41 a.m. ETJoni Ernst Stoops to Shocking Low When Told Medicaid Cuts Will KillSenator Joni Ernst had a disgusting answer when confronted by a constituent at her town hall about Trump’s budget bill.Drew Angerer/Getty ImagesRepublican Senator Joni Ernst had a particularly unhinged response to questions from her constituents at a town hall in Parkersburg, Iowa, on Friday.Ernst was asked about the GOP’s budget bill kicking people off of Medicaid, and her condescending answer quickly became callous and flippant as the Iowa politician smirked at the audience.“When you are arguing about illegals that are receiving Medicaid, 1.4 million, they’re not eligible, so they will be coming off, so—” Ernst began, before an audience member shouted, “People are going to die!”“People are not—well, we all are going to die,” Ernst responded, as the audience drowned her in loud protests.What was Ernst thinking with that answer? Almost every Republican town hall this year has gone badly for the politician holding it, thanks to President Trump upending the federal government, and Ernst surely knew that choosing death over Medicaid wouldn’t go over well with the crowd. Earlier this week in Nebraska, Representative Mike Flood was heckled after he admitted that he didn’t read the budget bill.Ersnt’s town hall wasn’t even the first one in Iowa to go badly for a Republican. On Wednesday, Representative Ashley Hinson was met with jeers and boos, with audience members in Decorah, Iowa calling her a fraud and a liar. But at least Hinson had the good sense not to seemingly embrace death over a vital, lifesaving government program. More on Trump’s bill:Here Are the Worst Things in Trump’s Big, Beautiful Bill Most Recent Post/May 30, 2025/11:35 a.m. ETKetanji Brown Jackson Blasts “Botched” Supreme Court Ruling on TPSSupreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, in a scathing disssent, called out the rest of the court for allowing Trump’s harmful executive order to stand.Anna Moneymaker/Getty ImagesSupreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson thinks the Supreme Court “botched” a decision to allow the Trump administration to revoke the Temporary Protected Status protections of about 500,000 Haitian, Cuban, Nicaraguan, and Venezuelan immigrants.Jackson and fellow liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor were the only two dissenters.“The Court has plainly botched this assessment today. It requires next to nothing from the Government with respect to irreparable harm,” Jackson wrote in the dissent. “And it undervalues the devastating consequences of allowing the Government to precipitously upend the lives of and livelihoods of nearly half a million noncitizens while their legal claims are pending.”TPS is a long-standing program that allowed those 500,000 immigrants to stay in the U.S. after they fled violence and risk in their home countries. After the Supreme Court’s ruling, all of them are at high risk of sudden deportation. “It is apparent that the government seeks a stay to enable it to inflict maximum predecision damage,” Jackson wrote.Read the full dissent here.View More Posts

Facepalm: In the latest example of why we shouldn't blindly put our faith in online map services, German autobahns and highways were plunged into chaos when Google Maps incorrectly showed that vast sections of the roads were closed. The incident's timing was especially bad as it coincided with the start of a holiday break. German motorists likely felt disheartened at the sight of all the stop signs on Google Maps on Thursday. The Guardian reports that major roads in western, northern, south-western and central parts of the country were shown as closed. Even parts of Belgium and the Netherlands appeared to have ground to a halt. The situation was exacerbated by the incident taking place at the start of a four-day break for the Ascension holiday, when many Germans were travelling. It led to a huge number of Google Maps users heading for alternative routes to avoid the non-existent closures. Somewhat ironically, this caused huge jams and delays on these smaller roads. Drivers not relying on Google Maps – and any Google users who decided to check another service or the news – didn't have to deal with these problems. Apple Maps, Waze, and the traffic reports all showed that everything was moving freely. The major highways were likely quieter than usual as so many Google Maps users were avoiding them. The apparent mass closure of so many roads caused panic among those who believed Google Maps' warning. Some thought there had been a terrorist attack or state-sponsored hack, while others speculated about a natural disaster. // Related Stories When asked about the glitch, which lasted around two hours, Google said the company wouldn't comment on the specific case. It added that Google Maps draws information from three key sources: individual users, public sources such as transportation authorities, and a mix of third-party providers. Ars Technica contacted Google to ask about the cause of the problem. A spokesperson said the company "investigated a technical issue that temporarily showed inaccurate road closures on the map" and has "since removed them." With Google Maps drawing information from third parties, the issue could partly have been related to the German Automobile Club's warning that there may be heavy traffic at the start of the holiday. Google also added AI features to Maps recently, and we all know how reliable they can be. There have been plenty of other incidents in which Google Maps got things very wrong. Germany was cursing the service again earlier this month when it showed highway tunnels being closed in part of the country when they were open. In 2023, Google was sued by the family of a North Carolina man who drove his car off a collapsed bridge as he followed directions given by Google Maps. The case is ongoing. Masthead: Bhavik Nasit

The Utah court of appeals has sanctioned a lawyer after he was discovered to have used ChatGPT for a filing he made in which he referenced a nonexistent court case.Earlier this week, the Utah court of appeals made the decision to sanction Richard Bednar over claims that he filed a brief which included false citations.According to court documents reviewed by ABC4, Bednar and Douglas Durbano, another Utah-based lawyer who was serving as the petitioner’s counsel, filed a “timely petition for interlocutory appeal”.Upon reviewing the brief which was written by a law clerk, the respondent’s counsel found several false citations of cases.“It appears that at least some portions of the Petition may be AI-generated, including citations and even quotations to at least one case that does not appear to exist in any legal database (and could only be found in ChatGPT and references to cases that are wholly unrelated to the referenced subject matter,” the respondent’s counsel said in documents reviewed by ABC4.The outlet reports that the brief referenced a case titled “Royer v Nelson”, which did not exist in any legal database.Following the discovery of the false citations, Bednar “acknowledged ‘the errors contained in the petition’ and apologized”, according to a document from the Utah court of appeals, ABC4 reports. It went on to add that during a hearing in April, Bednar and his attorney “acknowledged that the petition contained fabricated legal authority, which was obtained from ChatGPT, and they accepted responsibility for the contents of the petition”.According to Bednar and his attorney, an “unlicensed law clerk” wrote up the brief and Bednar did not “independently check the accuracy” before he made the filing. ABC4 further reports that Durbano was not involved in the creation of the petition and the law clerk responsible for the filing was a law school graduate who was terminated from the law firm.The outlet added that Bednar offered to pay any related attorney fees to “make amends”.In a statement reported by ABC4, the Utah court of appeals said: “We agree that the use of AI in the preparation of pleadings is a legal research tool that will continue to evolve with advances in technology. However, we emphasize that every attorney has an ongoing duty to review and ensure the accuracy of their court filings. In the present case, petitioner’s counsel fell short of their gatekeeping responsibilities as members of the Utah State Bar when they submitted a petition that contained fake precedent generated by ChatGPT.”As a result of the false citations, ABC4 reports that Bednar was ordered to pay the respondent’s attorney fees for the petition and hearing, refund fees to their client for the time used to prepare the filing and attend the hearing, as well as donate $1,000 to the Utah-based legal non-profit And Justice for All.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) gained indirect access to a vast network of AI-powered license plate reader cameras operated by Flock Safety, according to documents reviewed by 404 Media. ICE has no direct agreement with Flock, but has accessed the system through search requests routed via local and state law enforcement. The data, obtained from Danville, Illinois, through a public records request, revealed more than 4,000 lookups between June 2024 and May 2025 that listed reasons such as “immigration,” “ICE+ERO” or “ICE WARRANT.” These lookups were conducted by agencies across dozens of states, including police departments in Texas, Florida, Missouri and Arizona. In many cases, local officers acted on informal requests from federal agents. What is Flock Safety and how does the system work? Flock Safety operates over 40,000 automatic license plate reader (ALPR) cameras in more than 5,000 U.S. communities. The cameras continuously record vehicle data, including license plates, color, make and sometimes unique features such as bumper stickers or missing hubcaps. Officers using the system can track a vehicle’s movements over time, often without needing a warrant. According to the company’s documentation, agencies using the ‘National Lookup’ tool can query camera data from jurisdictions nationwide. The company claims that local users control the data and decide who can access it, although critics argue that the audit logs suggest limited oversight. Are police violating state laws or company policy? Illinois law prohibits law enforcement from using ALPR data for immigration enforcement, and Flock’s own policies forbid it. However, the audit data show that ICE and its Enforcement and Removal Operations division were able to utilize the system through state and local police indirectly. Danville officials denied that their officers conducted immigration lookups. However, 404 Media confirmed details of searches with several agencies that cited informal federal requests. Some departments said the data was used in broader criminal probes. Others acknowledged task force officers may have entered immigration-related terms in error. Civil liberties advocates warn that the practice raises significant privacy concerns and calls for public debate over the limits of law enforcement surveillance.

Not A Super Announcement Trump pulls Isaacman nomination for space. Source: “NASA is f***ed” "NASA's budget request is just a going-out-of-business mode" without Isaacman. Eric Berger – May 31, 2025 5:22 pm | 59 Jared Isaacman during training at SpaceX before the Polaris Dawn mission. Credit: SpaceX Jared Isaacman during training at SpaceX before the Polaris Dawn mission. Credit: SpaceX Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only   Learn more The Trump administration has confirmed that it is pulling the nomination of private astronaut Jared Isaacman to lead NASA. First reported by Semafor, the decision appears to have been made because Isaacman was not politically loyal enough to the Trump Administration. "The Administrator of NASA will help lead humanity into space and execute President Trump’s bold mission of planting the American flag on the planet Mars," Liz Huston, a White House Spokesperson, said in a statement released Saturday. "It's essential that the next leader of NASA is in complete alignment with President Trump’s America First agenda and a replacement will be announced directly by President Trump soon." The US Senate Commerce Committee approved Issacman's nomination by a vote of 19 to 9 one month ago, advancing his candidacy to the floor of the US Senate, with unanimous support from Republicans in that April vote. Approval was anticipated after the Memorial Day Holiday. But the tide started to turn against Isaacman late this past week, with the first rumblings of problems coming on Friday, May 30. Not MAGA enough On Saturday, far-right political activist Laura Loomer said on X, "Deep State operatives are trying to derail President Trump’s NASA Administrator pick Jared Isaacman before his Senate confirmation vote this week." This was the first public sign that Isaacman's candidacy was imperiled. So what happened? The waters of MAGA run murky, and the political machinations of the Trump administration are abstruse. However, the timing of Isaacman's derailment coincides with the recent departure of SpaceX founder Elon Musk from Washington. Musk had a central role in the Trump Administration during its first four months. In an interview on Tuesday, Musk told Ars that he has now "significantly" reduced his involvement in politics. Musk was a key factor behind Isaacman's nomination as NASA administrator, and with his backing, Isaacman was able to skip some of the party purity tests that have been applied to other Trump administration nominees. One mark against Isaacman is that he had recently donated money to Democrats. He also indicated opposition to some of the White House's proposed cuts to NASA's science budget. Musk's role in the government was highly controversial, winning him enemies both among opponents of Trump's "Make America Great Again" agenda as well as inside the administration. One source told Ars that, with Musk's exit, his opponents within the administration sought to punish him by killing Isaacman's nomination. The loss of Isaacman is almost certainly a blow to NASA, which faces substantial budget cuts. The Trump Administration's budget request for fiscal year 2026, released Friday, seeks $18.8 billion for the agency next year—a 24 percent cut from the agency's budget of $24.8 billion for FY 2025. Going out of business? Isaacman is generally well-liked in the space community and is known to care deeply about space exploration. Officials within the space agency—and the larger space community—hoped that having him as NASA's leader would help the agency restore some of these cuts. Now? "NASA is f---ed," one current leader in the agency told Ars on Saturday. "NASA's budget request is just a going-out-of-business mode without Jared there to innovate," a former senior NASA leader said. The Trump administration did not immediately name a new nominee, but two people told Ars that former US Air Force Lieutenant General Steven L. Kwast may be near the top of the list. Now retired, Kwast has a distinguished record in the Air Force and is politically loyal to Trump and MAGA. However, his background seems to be far less oriented toward NASA's civil space mission and far more focused on seeing space as a battlefield—decidedly not an arena for cooperation and peaceful exploration. Eric Berger Senior Space Editor Eric Berger Senior Space Editor Eric Berger is the senior space editor at Ars Technica, covering everything from astronomy to private space to NASA policy, and author of two books: Liftoff, about the rise of SpaceX; and Reentry, on the development of the Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon. A certified meteorologist, Eric lives in Houston. 59 Comments

Goodbye to start-stop systems – the EPA under Trump concludes that they are not worth it and could disappear from new models Goodbye to start-stop systems – the EPA under Trump concludes that they are not worth it and could disappear from new models The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) has spoken, and what was once an open secret now makes much more sense: stop-start systems in cars are useless. No, they’re not useful, they were supposedly designed to reduce fuel consumption when the car is idle but, let’s be honest, they’re pretty annoying.Now, the Trump administration has launched a crusade against these systems, which have been added to cars for more than 15 years. The EPA argues that they provide little or no real benefit in terms of emissions and that all they really do is wear down engine components. What stop-start systems were supposed to promise The idea was simple: eliminate fuel consumption during idling (when the car is stopped but still on, like at traffic lights or yield signs), especially in urban environments.This practice became popular in the early 2000s, when the U.S. Department of Energy and Argonne National Laboratory claimed that a car could consume up to half a gallon per hour while idling. They also claimed that automatically turning off the engine when the vehicle stops and turning it back on when it moves again could save between 4% and 10% of fuel in the city… far from reality.Included in every car Although it started as a premium feature, today 65% of cars sold in the USA have this system, compared to just 1% in 2012. In Europe and Japan, the number goes beyond 90%! And although it’s not legally required, manufacturers receive fuel economy credits for including it, and where there’s money, well, we know how that goes. The EPA hits the brakes Now, after years of research, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin stated that the system barely reduces emissions and causes premature wear on the starter motor (which makes sense, it starts more often, even several times within an hour). Although many tons of CO₂ savings have been estimated annually, the reality is that this system had many shortcomings, starting with the fact that it’s uncomfortable and annoying. And honestly… the fuel savings weren’t that great, estimated between 4% and 5%. Was it really that annoying? It was said that this system worked better in dense urban commutes, obviously, there are more stops than on a regular highway, where the system is irrelevant. Still, it’s annoying. Many drivers deactivate it due to discomfort or fear of it failing. The early versions were clunky and slow, and although they’ve improved, people still don’t like them. The future of stop-start: end of the road? It’s clear that brands started adding this system because of the incentives (not because they liked it) but now, if the EPA removes the credits that reward its use, brands will likely choose to eliminate it from future models. Especially now that we’re moving closer to an electric future, something that would make this system obsolete and unnecessary. Failed bet? At the time, they represented an attempt to reduce emissions, but now that electrification and hydrogen are just around the corner, we can say that these stop-start systems did their job and can now be put to rest (finally). What did the experts say? According to Consumer Reports, for example, it depended on the specific vehicle. They pointed out the pros and cons of the system but admitted that in many cases the system was inconsistent and, as we’ve said, very annoying. We’ll have to wait and see if this is a final goodbye (at least in our country, because Europe and China will probably continue using it) and whether we’ll miss it or feel relieved. And you, what do you think of the stop-start system? Did you find it annoying too?

submitted by /u/cmaia1503 [link] [comments]

Elon Musk's Tesla registrations suffered a drop in Québec. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images 2025-05-30T11:35:36Z Save Saved Read in app This story is available exclusively to Business Insider subscribers. Become an Insider and start reading now. Have an account? Tesla sales in Québec plunged 85% in the first quarter, mirroring sharp declines seen in Europe. Canada has frozen $43 million in Tesla EV rebates due to Trump's tariffs and fraud concerns. Musk's DOGE work sparked backlash, boycotts, and dealership vandalism across the US and Europe. Tesla's sales woes have reached Canada.Data from the vehicle registration authority in the province of Québec shows a dramatic decline in Tesla registrations in the first quarter of 2025.Only 524 new Tesla vehicles were registered in Québec between January and March 2025, down over 85% from the 5,097 units logged in the final months of 2024.The company's top-selling Model Y saw the steepest drop in terms of pure numbers, falling from 3,274 units in the final quarter of 2024 to 360 in the first quarter of 2025. The Model 3, Tesla's cheapest car, plunged from 1,786 to just 96 units over the same period, a fall of 94%.While the drop is precipitous, it should be noted that auto sales are generally lower in the first quarter of the year than later in the year.Though confined to one region of Canada, the collapse mirrors similar issues in Europe, where Tesla sales fell by nearly 50% in April despite overall EV demand continuing to grow.In Québec, as in Europe, demand for electric vehicles remains strong, suggesting that Tesla's slump is less about market conditions and more about the brand itself.Rebate freeze and trade tensionsSeveral factors appear to be converging.Tesla has been excluded from Canada's federal EV rebate program, with $43 million in rebates frozen and each individual claim now under review.Transport Minister Chrystia Freeland ordered the freeze in March following a last-minute surge in Tesla rebate applications — from 300 a day to nearly 5,800 — which triggered a probe into possible abuse.Freeland also said that Tesla would remain ineligible for future incentives as long as President Donald Trump's 25% tariffs on Canadian goods are in place.In parallel, provinces, including British Columbia, Prince Edward Island, and Manitoba, have removed Tesla from their rebate programs.Political backlashTesla's registration drop in Québec also comes amid a broader global backlash, especially in Europe, against CEO Elon Musk, who has endorsed a number of European political parties, including Germany's far-right AfD party and Britain's populist Reform UK party. In North America, Musk's role leading the Department of Government Efficiency has led to protests, boycotts, and vandalism of Tesla dealerships across at least a dozen states.Musk said this week he was stepping away from DOGE after months of involvement as a "special government employee." Federal law stipulates that those with this title cannot serve for more than 130 days in a 365-day period.Tesla's shares, which had come under pressure during Musk's DOGE stint, began rebounding in April after he announced he would step back from government work and "spend 24/7 at work" on his companies.In a Q&A published by Ars Technica on Tuesday, he said he'd been too involved in politics since wading into the 2024 presidential race last year — a campaign he heavily financed to the tune of nearly $300 million.In a sit-down with Bloomberg at the Qatar Economic Forum last week, he said he's no longer going to be spending big on politics, like he did in the 2024 election.Tesla did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Imagine downloading 10,000 4K movies in just a second. A team of Japanese researchers has achieved such a mind-blowing internet speed using a specially designed optical fiber that’s no thicker than what we use today. The researchers set a new world record, transmitting 1.02 petabits (1.02 x 106 GB) of data per second over a distance of 1,808 kilometers (~1,118 miles) using their special coupled 19-core optical fiber. However, this achievement isn’t just about faster internet.  In their new study, the researchers claim that their newly developed optical-fiber technology can help us prepare our networks for a future where data traffic will skyrocket, thanks to AI, 6G, the Internet of Things, and beyond. The science of insane internet speed For years, scientists have tried to increase the amount of data that can travel through optical fibers. While they’ve managed to send petabits per second before, they could only do it over short distances (less than 1,000 km or 621 miles).  Long-distance transmission has always been challenging. That’s because the signal weakens as it travels, and amplifying it across many fiber cores without creating interference is a major technical challenge. The study authors tackled the problem by designing a special type of optical fiber—a 19-core fiber.  Think of it like replacing a single-lane road with a 19-lane superhighway, all bundled into a fiber just 0.125 mm thick, the same size as those used in existing infrastructure. Each core carried data independently, and together they allowed a huge amount of information to move simultaneously. The researchers also developed a smart amplification system. Optical signals lose strength as they move along the fiber, so amplifiers are used to boost them. However, there’s one catch:  each core had to be amplified at the same time, and across two different bands of light (C-band and L-band).  The team built a system that used a combination of special amplifiers to do this in all 19 cores without mixing up the signals. They set up 19 recirculating loops, each using one core of the fiber, and passed the signals through them 21 times to simulate a total distance of 1,808 kilometers.  At the end of the journey, a 19-channel receiver caught the signals, and a multi-input multi-output (MIMO)-based digital processor cleaned them up, removing interference and calculating the data rate.  The result was astonishing. A total capacity of 1.02 petabits per second over 1,808 km was achieved, setting a new world record for optical fiber communication using standard-sized fibers. Even more impressive, the capacity-distance product, a key measure of fiber performance, reached 1.86 exabits per second-km, the highest ever recorded. A powerful and practical fiber technology A table comparing the performance of different fiber-optic cables. Source: NICT This isn’t the first time a 19-core optical fiber has been put to the test. “The transmission over an earlier generation of 19-core coupled-core fiber was limited to 1.7 petabits per second over a relatively short distance of 63.5 km,” the study authors added. However, this is indeed the first time that this revolutionary technology has broken the distance limits by carrying data over 1,800 km. This success could completely reshape how we build the internet of tomorrow.  As the world moves into the post-5G era, with self-driving cars, AI assistants, real-time VR, and billions of connected devices, we’ll need massive data highways to keep everything running.  “In the post-5G society, the volume of data traffic is expected to increase explosively due to new communication services, and the realization of advanced information and communication infrastructure is required,” the study authors added.RECOMMENDED ARTICLES This research shows that it’s possible to build ultra-high-speed, long-distance fiber networks without changing the size of existing infrastructure, which makes real-world deployment much easier. However, when this new optical fiber technology will actually roll out remains to be seen. The study was presented at the 48th Optical Fiber Communication Conference (OFC 2025).

submitted by /u/AgentBlue62 [link] [comments]

Tesla Dumping Unsold Cybertrucks At Mall Parking Lot And The City’s Fed Up Detroit’s planning and community chief told the run-down lot’s landlord that storage of vehicles was not a permitted use of the land https://www.carscoops.com/author/chris-chilton-cc/ by Chris Chilton May 28, 2025 at 09:50 html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd" Farmington Hills officials are fuming over a glut of unsold Cybertrucks being stored in the city. Tesla has been parking the EVs at a shopping center earmarked for major redevelopment. Officials say the electric vehicles violate zoning codes and are warning the property owner. Tesla’s Cybertruck is a big silver sales flop and that’s given the company several problems, including working out what to do with all the electric pickups it can’t sell. Some of those trucks ended up stored at a run-down mall in Farmington Hills outside of Detroit in Michigan. Unsurprisingly, local officials are not happy about it. Dozens of Cybertrucks and some other Tesla models are currently occupying several rows of parking bays at the Hunter’s Square shopping center, Crain’s Detroit Business reports. The lot is home to a now-closed Bed, Bath and Beyond, an also-shuttered Torrid, and a Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant that’s still open, and has plenty of space for the EVs. But using the land for vehicle storage is against city code. Related: Cybertruck Owners Can’t Believe Tesla’s Trade-In Values The shopping center landlord has already been informed of the violation, according to comments made by Charmaine Kettler-Schmult, director of planning and community development for Farmington Hills, Michigan to CDB. But she admitted to reporters that the enforcement process “takes time.” The report notes Tesla recently opened a brand new showroom close to the Hunter’s Square shopping center in West Bloomfield, which could be the source of the idled Cybertrucks. Crain’s Detroit Business reached out to both the registered owner of that site and the landlord of Hunter’s Square, which is due to get a major overhaul, but neither responded. Tesla CEO Elon Musk once bragged of having 1 million reservations for the Cybertruck, but the much-delayed EV has failed to live up to sales expectations since its official debut in late 2023. Only 40,000 were sold last year, well short of the 250,000 Tesla predicted, according to Forbes. And recently the Cybertruck was outperformed by its more conventional-looking Ford F-150 Lightning rival. More: What Happened To Musk’s 1 Million Cybertruck Reservations? Tesla has made moves to open up the Cybetruck’s appeal, however. In April it finally unveiled a single-motor, rear-wheel drive, entry-level model for $69,990 and buyers of other grades have been offered discounts, lease deals and free supercharging. Lead image: Instagram/@cheapyd Load more comments