In May 2015, prominent right-wing intellectual Charles Murray published a book calling on the superrich to fund an American rebellion against their government.Titled By the People: Rebuilding Liberty Without Permission, the book argued that the growth of the regulatory state was worse than dangerous: It was an existential threat to the American way of life. For this reason, federal authority had become fundamentally illegitimate. The normal political process — most notably elections — was hopelessly compromised, to the point where no candidate promising to roll back the size of the state could hope to win.The best solution, in Murray’s eyes, was for wealthy donors to fund a legal defense designed to facilitate a mass campaign of civil disobedience against the regulatory state. This so-called Madison Fund would defend people accused of noncompliance in court and pay any assessed fines if they lose. With enough donations, the Madison Fund could ensure that nearly anyone could disobey regulations with impunity.By the People has largely been forgotten today. It was published one month before Donald Trump descended the golden escalator at Trump Tower, announcing a presidential bid that would alter the course of history. Trump’s rejection of old GOP orthodoxies, including its libertarian hostility to programs like Social Security, suggested that Murray’s anti-government radicalism might belong to an era of the past.But the events of the second Trump term, most notably DOGE’s lawless gutting of the federal government, suggest that the book deserves a second look. Its extreme hostility to the very idea of liberal governance, its skepticism of democracy, and its faith in the primacy of the wealthy over the law all prefigured the way that Trump and Elon Musk would assail key functions of government in 2025.Moreover, it helps us understand why mainstream conservatives — the sort who pledge unending fealty to the Constitution and the founders — have been so okay with all of this. It’s not only that people on the right fear crossing Trump; it’s also, in part, that they share his belief that the American government is no longer worthy of respect.For if the state has become too big to command legitimacy, to the point where ordinary citizens are justified in disobeying it, then why should anyone care if the duly elected government breaks laws in pursuit of shrinking itself?By the People, explainedCharles Murray has been a leading intellectual figure on the right for a very long time. Generally speaking, his work has focused on class and race inequality in the United States — and, more specifically, with the idea that welfare programs either do little to fix these problems or actually make them worse.His most (in)famous book, 1994’s The Bell Curve, argues that much of America’s class and racial stratification can be explained by gaps in IQ — suggesting, in one of its most provocative chapters, that white people have higher IQs than Black people due to their superior genes. The book made theorizing about genetic differences between the races acceptable among certain corners of the mainstream right, paving the way for scientific racism’s resurgence in the Trump era.By the People is, in some ways, a more ambitious book than The Bell Curve. Moving away from social policy, Murray strays into the realm of political theory — arguing not just that liberal policies have bad consequences, but that that they are fundamentally illegitimate uses of state power. The concept of “legitimacy,” generally speaking, refers to the principle used to assess whether a particular government is morally justified in exercising political power. In Murray’s view, the key principle is government non-interference in personal affairs. The modern regulatory state, and its involvement in life ranging from setting education policy to licensing barber shops, has become so corrosive of American liberty that it cannot be seen as legitimate.“It is part of our national catechism that government is instituted to protect our unalienable rights, and that when it becomes destructive of those rights, the reason for our allegiance is gone,” he writes. “At that point, revolution is not treason, but the people’s right.”Charles Murray speaking at the 2013 FreedomFest in Las Vegas. Gage Skidmore/Flickr Creative CommonsTo support this claim, he quotes a list of luminaries — ranging from Alexis de Tocqueville to Grover Cleveland — to argue that Americans have almost always believed in a state whose legitimacy is grounded in self-limitation.“The federal government lost its legitimacy in theory during the constitutional revolution of 1937-1942, lost its legitimacy in practice during the 1960s, and it has been downhill ever since,” he writes. “It is by that historical understanding that many of us who are devoted to limited government have thought of ourselves as living in a post-American country, governed by people who mouth the clichés about America as the land of the free without understanding what freedom means.”It may occur to you, at this point, that Murray has a democracy problem. Very few Americans actually agree with this libertarian vision of the American state, and they express that disagreement by electing non-libertarian politicians. In a democracy, the key principle of legitimacy is not libertarian theories of rights but rather popular sovereignty. It is the people, collectively, who decide on the limits of power — under conditions of free debate and exercised within constitutional constraints. If the people think the regulatory state is legitimate, why should Charles Murray and his libertarian friends get to ignore the laws that everyone else voted for?By the People offers two contradictory answers to this question. The first is that the people really have turned on the government, a big claim Murray supports with data showing a consistent decline in trust in government over the years. But this is measuring something different than basic legitimacy. Moreover, Murray once again has a democracy problem. If voters really were so furious about big government that they believed the entire state was illegitimate, then why aren’t radical anti-government politicians winning in landslides? To this, we have Murray’s second answer: that the people are bought off. They have become so dependent on government goodies that there is no hope for a return to pre-New Deal America.“The proportion of Americans who depend on the federal government to put food on the table, whether through welfare, Social Security, a government paycheck, or a paycheck financed by a federal contract, will continue to increase, and it will push the Republican Party to the center in all presidential elections,” he writes.Here Murray betrays himself: admitting, implicitly, that he does not really care about popular sovereignty. He admits that people routinely choose, in democratic elections, to authorize and reauthorize an expansive state — but dismisses their right to make a choice he personally finds antithetical to liberty. He is certain his libertarian view of legitimacy is true, regardless of what the people think, and thus is convinced that people like him are justified in ignoring the law.But how could anyone ever hope to win a fight against the federal leviathan when the people have been bought off by Social Security? This is where his “Madison Fund” financing civil disobedience comes in: Murray believes that successfully defending people who ignore regulations will help others realize that a better future without government interference could actually be possible.And it all starts, in his mind, with one good billionaire.“The Madison Fund could get started,” he writes, “if just one wealthy American cared enough to contribute, say, a few hundred million dollars.”By the People as Trumpist urtextMurray’s specific vision for a “Madison Fund” was certainly idiosyncratic. But his broader argument about legitimacy was widely shared on the 2010s right, heard often among the Tea Party types who dominated conservative politics for most of the Obama presidency.Indeed, By the People was received warmly among traditional conservatives, some of whom described its wild arguments as helpfully restrained. “If you want a book that will crisply outline what has happened to Madisonian America since the Great Depression, without scaring the neighbors, it’s your lucky day,” Charles C.W. Cooke writes in National Review. Some even suggested it didn’t go far enough. Writing in Law and Liberty, Lenore Ealy argued that Murray gave short shrift to the concerns of social conservatives. And that liberal America “created for itself a soft despotism” where people from various “identity groups” wield power to silence “men and women unwilling to subsume their identity in the will of the State.” Rolling back the state is not far enough, Ealy says — there needs to be a revolution in “cultural mores” that beats back identity liberalism.By the People remains useful as an unusually clear explanation of how widely shared premises on the establishment right led the country to Trumpist perdition.It is striking that, even before Trump, the idea that the modern American state was fundamentally illegitimate was such a prevalent view among conservative activists and intellectuals. The question was not whether the right must always defer to the democratic process, but how far it might have to go to get around it.In Trump’s second term, we are seeing the fruits of this vision. In many ways, you can draw a straight line between the basic premises of By the People and Trump’s assault on the federal government. The mechanisms are very different, but the ends are strikingly similar.During the 2024 election, Elon Musk became the billionaire anti-government donor Murray dreamed of, contributing “a few hundred million dollars” to the Trump campaign. His alignment with Trump got him appointed the head of a government-slashing committee that we now know as DOGE; once in power, he and his allies attempted to gut the functioning of various different federal agencies (to various degrees of success).Elon Musk at the Conservative Political Action Conference in February 2025 in Maryland. Andrew Harnik/Getty ImagesDOGE was not an effective cost-cutting mechanism. Nor has it turned up significant evidence of fraud. What it has accomplished, rather, is make federal agencies less capable of implementing duly authorized regulations. Effectively, it’s done what Murray wanted from the opposite end: decreasing the scope of the regulatory state not by resistance from the bottom, but a top-down effort to strip its capabilities. (Nor is Musk alone in this; look at Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s firing of large chunks of America’s public health officials).The legal authority for all of this is dubious at best. Trump and DOGE have simply asserted the power to mass-fire employees and redirect congressionally appropriated funds, even though there are good reasons to believe that they do not have the legal authority to do either. Like Murray, they do not see the law as morally binding. These aren’t just simple parallels. The influence of ideas like By the People’s helps us understand why a conservative movement that once claimed to stand for the constitutional order has become comfortable with Trump wrecking it.The essential idea of Murray’s book, and much of pre-Trump conservatism, was that the federal government had become hostile to founding American ideals: that the administrative state represents an unconstitutional cancerous growth on a brilliant governing framework.“We have overseen and sanctioned the growth of an administrative system that concentrates the power to make laws and the power to enforce them in the hands of a vast and unaccountable administrative apparatus that finds no comfortable home in our constitutional structure,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a 2015 concurrence. “The end result may be trains that run on time (although I doubt it), but the cost is to our Constitution and the individual liberty it protects.”If you take this position, thinly veiled comparisons to fascism and all, then the fact that Trump and Musk have frequently exceeded legal boundaries starts to look a lot less problematic. Through this lens, the administration is trying to rescue the Constitution’s original design from a liberalism that has corrupted it. Any legal violations along the way are offenses against a political order that at present does not deserve citizens’ allegiance. In February, the news outlet NOTUS asked Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) about the lawfulness of the Trump/Musk agenda. Tillis conceded that it “runs afoul of the Constitution in the strictest sense.” However, he added, “nobody should bellyache about that” — because “it’s not uncommon for presidents to flex a little bit on where they can spend and where they can stop spending.”Thom Tillis is not a firebreather: He’s a purple state senator widely seen as a moderate. That he would take such a permissive position on what even he admits is lawbreaking shows the corrosive influence of Murray-style thinking on the right today.By the People, on its own, may be a mostly forgotten book. But it remains useful as an unusually clear explanation of how widely shared premises on the establishment right led the country to Trumpist perdition.This story was adapted for the On the Right newsletter. New editions drop every Wednesday. Sign up here.Correction, May 21, 9:20 am ET: A previous version of this story misdescribed Trump’s 2015 descent down the golden escalator at Trump Tower.See More:

Carrie Pallardy, Contributing ReporterMay 21, 20258 Min Readrudi1976 via Alamy StockNick Lucius has spent his entire career in government service. He has put his skills as an attorney and data scientist to work in several roles with the City of Chicago. Last year, he was confirmed as the city’s CIO, heading up the newly formed Department of Technology and Innovation.  “I’m proud of what we're doing in Chicago … saving significant amounts of money by being more efficient,” Lucius tells InformationWeek. “We’ve saved $6 million already in 2025, which is a significant part of our budget. But [we did] so without a reduction in the delivery of services to humans.”  He talks about how he built his career and how he is aiming to increase both efficiency and access to services for Chicagoans.  Law and Computer Science Lucius plays guitar and piano. His early career ambitions focused on music but shifted to politics and government. During his undergraduate years at Ohio State University, he worked for the Ohio Statehouse.  “I was just really interested in the power of the justice system and how just how much having an advocate can really make a difference in that,” Lucius shares.  That interest led him to law school. He attended DePaul University, a choice that was driven by its location. “Chicago, I chose for the city. I absolutely love the city,” he recalls.  Related:Lucius earned joint degrees in law and computer science. His original intention was to pursue patent law with an interest in technology issues.  Nick LuciusWhile his career took a different path, his skills in computer science and law have served him well. “If I learned anything in the law, it was that having someone articulating as an advocate on behalf of a cause can do so much to move us toward progress,” he says.Armed with the ability to shape a narrative and champion a cause, Lucius has seen how technology can breathe life into those visions.  “On the technology side, I can then build and say, ‘OK, now we’re going to implement a system ... We’re going to create something. We’re going to put something out there that wasn’t out there before to move this cause forward,’” he says.  A Career in Government Lucius had those plans for patent law, but he graduated around the time of the Great Recession that began in 2007. Law firms weren’t hiring. But, as it turns out, the City of Chicago was. He got his start as assistant corporation counsel in the city’s Department of Law, focusing on foreclosures and abandoned buildings. “As soon as I started doing that, I forgot about everything I went to school for, and I spent about 10 years in litigation trying to help out the people of Chicago,” he says.  Related:After all those years of litigation, Lucius’s interest in technology began to resurface. “I also noticed that in my legal cases I had to do a lot of digging into city data systems and city technology systems in order to get my evidence,” he recalls.  He saw how modernizing city systems and connecting those systems across departments could make a big difference in the lives of residents. That spark got him back to his technology roots. He started taking on community projects and volunteer coding classes to hone his skills.  That reinvigorated interest in technology lead to roles as a data scientist with the city and then chief data officer and CTO with the office of the mayor.  Spearheading a New Department As Lucius moved through each of these roles and now in his position as CIO, he increasingly took on leadership responsibilities.  “I’m a builder by nature. And so I always love to roll up my sleeves and get into a problem,” says Lucius. “I find myself in the role now more often of … people [looking] to me for inspiration … leadership and vision.”  As the head of the department of technology and innovation, Lucius and his team have responsibilities for a vast array of systems that support the third-most populous city in the country.  Related:“We do so much: everything from supply the drinking water, pumping billions of gallons to not just Chicago but 125 cities in the area coming from Lake Michigan. Two major airports, international airports, 250 square miles of roads and sewers,” Lucius notes. “What we do is so massive, and one of the first orders of business when we got started was, we have a lot to just maintain and support.” Lucius leads a team of 75 people, which is slated to grow to 150 by the end of the year. In addition, he works with a large network of vendors and consultants that support the city’s IT systems.  The team is organized into different groups: planning, delivery, support, and cybersecurity. “When someone comes and says, ‘Hey, Nick, I need some help. I need a new website. I need a new app. I need you to solve this problem for me.’ We’re going to plan it. We’re going to build it. We’re going to deliver it. After that, we’ll support it, and we’ll make it’s safe and secure.” Lucius spends the majority of a typical day, up to 75% of it, in collaboration spaces. He is talking to team members, attending events, working to ideate. The remainder of his day is spent thinking about the future.  “What’s happening with AI? Where are we going with quantum computing here in Chicago? What’s our innovation play right now?” he asks.  As any CIO knows, not every day is a typical one. Systems go down. Fires have to be put out. Lucius was just a few months into the CIO role when the CrowdStrike global IT outage hit last year, impacting Windows machines across the city.  “Those kinds of days, when they come … it could be the only thing I do from the moment I wake up until the moment I go to sleep,” says Lucius.  While days like this are inevitable, Lucius and his team still have a bigger picture and goals in sight. The more time it takes to access a benefit, the harder it is for the people who need that benefit the most to get it. He is hoping to use technology to increase equity and accessibility to government services.  “I want to see a decrease in the difficulty that it takes a person with a disability to apply for everything from a disability sticker for the car so that they can park close to their home, to apply for social benefits programs, whether that’s financial assistance or assistance with something in their home or something necessary for their life,” he offers as an example.  Challenges in Government  CIOs across industries share many of the same responsibilities and challenges, but there are sector-specific nuances, too. Lucius notes how much scrutiny public sector CIOs face compared to their private sector peers.  “Even publicly traded organizations don’t quite have the amount of scrutiny and attention that that a major government institution gets,” he contends.  And there is a reason for that pressure. Transparency is important. Delivering government services to citizens is essential. That responsibility is one of the biggest worries on Lucius’s mind.  Major government technology projects often get a lot of time and money, and yet they might fail. “You don’t have to look too far to see examples,” says Lucius. “When Healthcare.gov launched, it didn’t work.” He believes that it isn’t enough to have a great idea, get it funded, and get it launched. He sees the need to constantly evaluate projects to ensure they are actually successful.  “Success is when something works better for Chicagoans and something works better for a human being on the other end, and they get that benefit,” he emphasizes.  How should young people with ambitions in technology and government be thinking about these challenges, particularly during such a turbulent time? Lucius still wants to see people chase their dreams, but he cautions that they need something to latch onto in such a high-pressure field.  “Maybe [you] have family or [you] have personal experience where what we do here helped or maybe … you’ve just seen the benefit play out for human beings out there in the world,” says Lucius. “If you can latch on to that, that’s something you need in order to get through some of these experiences.”  A Reimagined Future Lucius sees people in the government technology space at a crossroads. They are faced with the major pressures of today’s societal and financial upheaval and the promises of delivering on new technology, like AI.  “All these things … have the potential to make things faster and more efficient, but then also bring the dangers of widening inequities and creating divides in society,” says Lucius. “We sit at the cusp of the reimagination of what it is to govern and what it is to oversee the provision of benefits in this society. And I want government technologists to recognize that … we can own that.” Lucius wants to bring services and benefits to the people of Chicago more efficiently without reducing those services. “We talk a lot about government efficiency these days,” he says. “I think Chicago is a great example.” About the AuthorCarrie PallardyContributing ReporterCarrie Pallardy is a freelance writer and editor living in Chicago. She writes and edits in a variety of industries including cybersecurity, healthcare, and personal finance.See more from Carrie PallardyWebinarsMore WebinarsReportsMore ReportsNever Miss a Beat: Get a snapshot of the issues affecting the IT industry straight to your inbox.SIGN-UPYou May Also Like

Two Evangelical Christian leaders sent an open letter to President Trump on Wednesday, warning of the dangers of out-of-control artificial intelligence and of automating human labor.The letter comes just weeks after the new Pope, Leo XIV, declared he was concerned with the “defense of human dignity, justice and labor” amid what he described as the “new industrial revolution” spurred by advances in AI.“As people of faith, we believe we should rapidly develop powerful AI tools that help cure diseases and solve practical problems, but not autonomous smarter-than-human machines that nobody knows how to control,” reads the open letter, signed by the Reverends Johnnie Moore and Samuel Rodriguez. “The world is grappling with a new reality because of the pace of the development of this technology, which represents an opportunity of great promise but also of potential peril especially as we approach artificial general intelligence.”Rodriguez, the President of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, spoke at Trump’s first presidential inauguration in 2017. Moore, who is also the founder of the public relations firm Kairos, served on Trump’s Evangelical executive board during his first presidential candidacy.The letter is a sign of growing ties between religious and AI safety groups, which share some of the same worries. It was shared with journalists by representatives of the Future of Life Institute—an AI safety organization that campaigns to reduce what it sees as the existential risk posed by advanced AI systems.The world’s biggest tech companies now all believe that it is possible to create so-called “artificial general intelligence”—a form of AI that can do any task better than a human expert. Some researchers have even invoked this technology in religious terms—for example, OpenAI’s former chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, a mystical figure who famously encouraged colleagues to chant “feel the AGI” at company gatherings. The emerging possibility of AGI presents, in one sense, a profound challenge to many theologies. If we are in a universe where a God-like machine is possible, what space does that leave for God himself?“The spiritual implications of creating intelligence that may one day surpass human capabilities raises profound theological and ethical questions that must be thoughtfully considered with wisdom,” the two Reverends wrote in their open letter to President Trump. “Virtually all religious traditions warn against a world where work is no longer necessary or where human beings can live their lives without any guardrails.”Though couched in adulatory language, the letter presents a vision of AI governance that differs from Trump’s current approach. The president has embraced the framing of the U.S. as in a race with China to get to AGI first, and his AI czar, David Sacks, has warned that regulating the technology would threaten the U.S.’s position in that race. The White House AI team is stacked with advisors who take a dismissive view of alignment risks—or the idea that a smarter-than-human AI might be hostile to humans, escape their control, and cause some kind of catastrophe.“We believe you are the world’s leader now by Divine Providence to also guide AI,” the letter says, addressing Trump, before urging him to consider convening an ethical council to consider not only “what AI can do but also what it should do.”“To be clear: we are not encouraging the United States, and our friends, to do anything but win the AI race,” the letter says. “There is no alternative. We must win. However, we are advising that this victory simply must not be a victory at any cost.”The letter echoes some themes that have increasingly been explored inside the Vatican, not just by Pope Leo XIV but also his predecessor, Pope Francis. Last year, in remarks at an event held at the Vatican about AI, Francis argued that AI must be used to improve, not degrade, human dignity.“Does it serve to satisfy the needs of humanity, to improve the well-being and integral development of people?” he asked. Or does it “serve to enrich and increase the already high power of the few technological giants despite the dangers to humanity?”To some Catholic theologians, AGI is simply the newest incarnation of a long-standing threat to the Church: false idols. “The presumption of substituting God for an artifact of human making is idolatry, a practice Scripture explicitly warns against,” reads a lengthy missive on AI published by the Vatican in January. “AI may prove even more seductive than traditional idols for, unlike idols that ‘have mouths but do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, but do not hear’, AI can ‘speak,’ or at least gives the illusion of doing so. Yet, it is vital to remember that AI is but a pale reflection of humanity—it is crafted by human minds, trained on human-generated material, responsive to human input, and sustained through human labor.”

Ming - stock.adobe.com Opinion UK Fraud Bill targets benefit claimants for mass surveillance The UK government’s proposed Fraud Bill will disproportionately place millions of benefit claimants under constant surveillance, creating a two-tier system where people are automatically suspected of wrongdoing for seeking welfare By Anna Dent Published: 21 May 2025 Earlier this month the House of Lords had its first debate on the Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill.  The Bill aims to reduce government losses to benefit fraud and error, and would give the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) unprecedented powers of investigation to routinely and covertly check benefit claimants' bank accounts, the right to enter private homes, and to seize drivers' licenses or money from bank accounts. Expert organisations including Justice, the Public Law Project and Big Brother Watch warn that although the aim of the Bill is hugely important, the proposed powers are disproportionate and represent a breach of human rights. As Baroness Finn remarked in the Lords, "support for the goal must not mean silence about the means." The Bill promises an expanded regime of digital surveillance for people in receipt of Universal Credit, Employment and Support Allowance, and State Pension Credit. This includes the introduction of an 'Eligibility Verification Measure' (EVM) which would enable DWP to direct banks to check millions of bank accounts for as yet unspecified indicators of benefit fraud and error.  DWP already has similar powers but crucially can only use them where it has 'reasonable grounds' to suspect fraud is taking place, which is the standard threshold for many comparable state powers. This Bill would completely remove that threshold, and enable intrusive surveillance without any justification. Details on exactly how the EVM will be used are sparse, but it could theoretically result in every single claimant’s bank account being checked, with no suspicion or indication of any fraud, error or over-payment needed.  Accounts flagged through these checks would then be passed to a member of DWP staff for further investigation, but what this will involve is still unclear. A code of practice to accompany the Bill is still unpublished, so we don't actually know what sequence of events would play out. Will individuals be informed when they are being investigated? Will their benefits be suspended during an investigation? Will their claim be assessed by other fraud algorithms? In some circumstances, the Department could automatically take money from the bank accounts of people no longer on benefits if they are deemed to have committed fraud or been accidentally overpaid. Banks will be prevented from informing their customers that this recovery process is happening, so the first that a customer might know is when money disappears from their account.  The finance industry has expressed concern about tensions between the obligations the Bill would create and financial institutions' consumer obligations, the risks of financial harm to vulnerable customers, and the lack of robust safeguards for the transfer of banking data. Others are concerned about the potential for miscarriages of justice which many will be unable to effectively challenge: the benefits covered by the Bill are only available to people on a low income, who are unlikely to have the means to engage in legal action. These powers would apply to both fraud and error, including over-payments caused by the Department's own mistakes. Overpayments can be caused by myriad mistakes on the part of DWP or claimant, or both, and the complexity of making claims is well known. But under the Bill, fraud and error will be treated the same, with the same digital surveillance deployed and the same powers to seize money and other assets. Universal Credit already appears to be particularly prone to mistakes and over-payments. Rather than punishing people after the fact, it would be better for DWP to work out why it is particularly vulnerable, do more to help people avoid mistakes, and reduce the rate at which their own mistakes cause over-payments. Treating all claimants like intentional fraudsters stigmatises people on benefits, and risks people who need financial support disengaging from the benefit system. Rather than focus on professional criminals who are actively defrauding the Department, the bill scoops everyone up and places them all under suspicion. It creates a two-tier system in which benefit claimants would be subject to an invasion of privacy not applied to the rest of the population: millions of people who have done nothing wrong will be laid open to mass surveillance. DWP officers would be given police-like powers of entry to private premises and seizure of private property. This is an extraordinary expansion of very serious powers targeted at one section of society. It fundamentally undermines basic rights to privacy and to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise.  Whether the ends justify these heavy-handed means is doubtful. The Department's own impact assessment estimates that just 2% of social security fraud and error over-payments will be clawed back through the use of these powers over 10 years: a disproportionate invasion of privacy for little benefit. The finance industry also warns that the organised gangs who carry out large-scale benefit fraud using sophisticated methods to avoid detection will easily find ways to work around the new powers.  Also on its way through the legislative process is the Data Use and Access Bill, which proposes to reduce the requirement for human oversight of automated decisions within government. If both Bills pass into law as currently drafted, there is a potential future in which the human-in-the-loop safeguards relating to digital bank surveillance are no longer legally required. This leaves the door open to hugely consequential decisions being made entirely by automated systems. We know that existing DWP fraud algorithms generate bias; the introduction of more automation and digital surveillance and the potential for less human oversight should trouble us all.  Increasing the number of people that are flagged for investigation via these new powers could put thousands more through the difficult process of fraud investigation. DWP’s own figures show that three-quarters of people whose benefit claims are flagged as suspicious actually have no fraud or error related to their claim at all. Ten million people receive the benefits that will be covered by the new powers: if even 1% of claimants are wrongly investigated many thousands of people will be affected.  As well as the immediate impact of these disproportionate powers, politicians need to be aware of the precedents they are setting, and how the legislation could be used by other administrations in future. Eliminating the need for the government to justify wholesale digital surveillance removes a basic protection against state over-reach. Only the state pension is explicitly excluded from the powers in the Bill: a government with an even more single-minded obsession with efficiency and fraud could roll out the bank surveillance to many, many other people. What will affect a minority now could become the norm for the majority. Anna Dent is an independent researcher and policy consultant, working on the digital welfare state and human-centred technology Read more about digital surveillance UK government outlines plan to surveil migrants with eVisa data: Electronic visa data and biometric technologies will be used by the UK’s immigration enforcement authorities to surveil migrants living in the country and to ‘tighten control of the border’, attracting strong criticism from migrant support groups. AI surveillance towers place migrants in ‘even greater jeopardy’: The use of autonomous surveillance towers throughout the English coast forces migrants into increasingly dangerous routes and contributes to their criminalisation. Invasive tracking ‘endemic’ on sensitive support websites: Websites set up by police, charities and universities to help people get support for sensitive issues like addiction and sexual harassment are deploying tracking technologies that harvest information without proper consent. In The Current Issue: UK critical systems at risk from ‘digital divide’ created by AI threats UK at risk of Russian cyber and physical attacks as Ukraine seeks peace deal Standard Chartered grounds AI ambitions in data governance Download Current Issue Microsoft entices developers to build more Windows AI apps – Cliff Saran's Enterprise blog Red Hat launches llm-d community & project – Open Source Insider View All Blogs

Banánka House | © Matej Hakár Tucked at the forested edge of the village of Banka, Slovakia, the Banánka House by Paulíny Hovorka Architects presents a compelling case for contemporary domestic architecture that merges tectonic clarity with landscape immersion. Conceived as a tranquil family retreat, the project engages with its natural surroundings through mimicry, strategic alignment, material honesty, and spatial humility. The house, completed in 2024, demonstrates how architectural restraint can produce profound spatial richness rooted in its immediate context. Banánka House Technical Information Architects1-14: Paulíny Hovorka Architects Location: Banka, Slovakia Area: 416 m2 | 4,477 Sq. Ft. Project Year: 2020 – 2024 Photographs: © Matej Hakár Our goal was to create a home that dissolves into the landscape; not through mimicry, but through spatial clarity, material honesty, and a deep respect for the existing garden and forest context. – Braňo Hovorka & Martin Paulíny, Paulíny Hovorka Architects Banánka House Photographs Aerial View | © Matej Hakár Aerial View | © Matej Hakár Aerial View | © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár © Matej Hakár Context and Site Integration The siting of the Banánka House is informed by the quiet drama of the landscape: a narrow, tree-lined valley bordered by a stream and punctuated with mature vegetation. The location, formerly a private garden plot, offers deep privacy and a rare ecological density. Rather than flattening the site’s particularities, the design responds through subtraction and negotiation, shaping space around every tree and allowing the topography and the existing vegetation to dictate the orientation and form. The Y-shaped plan emerges as a calibrated response to solar orientation and visual permeability. Each wing subtly avoids the existing trees while dividing the expansive 2,338 m² plot into smaller, intimate gardens. These outdoor “rooms” are not ornamental but spatial continuations of the interior, forming a sequence of landscape moments that support the house’s contemplative intent. The architectural narrative here is one of measured insertion, of making space without domination. Architectural Strategy and Spatial Configuration At the heart of the house lies a central living hall, a capacious yet grounded volume that anchors the three divergent wings. The organization radiates from this communal core. One wing houses the children’s and guest rooms, another the master suite and wellness area, and the third accommodates the entry, storage, and technical spaces. The cruciform-like geometry ensures that each functional zone is autonomous and connected, enabling a coherent domestic flow while maintaining privacy. Circulation is direct and legible, eschewing unnecessary corridors in favor of open transitions that extend outward toward the landscape. Programmatic zoning further reinforces the spatial hierarchy. Noisy and social functions are clustered in the center, while private and meditative spaces taper off into the periphery. The result is an architecture of quiet adjacency, where the interior is continuously in dialogue with the exterior yet never competes with it. Banánka House Materiality and Construction Materially, Banánka asserts itself with raw precision. Board-formed concrete ceilings and walls form the structural and atmospheric backbone of the house. The texture, an imprint of timber shuttering, evokes both permanence and memory, grounding the building in its material origins. This monolithic palette is punctuated by galvanized steel gabion walls filled with crushed stone, further blurring the threshold between architecture and terrain. Timber elements, in thermally modified pine and engineered oak, lend a tactile warmth to the composition, mediating the concrete’s brute strength. The project’s fenestration, ultra-slim framed glazing by KOYA and Otiima, avoids ornament in favor of maximum openness. These sliding elements disappear into wall pockets, dissolving boundaries and allowing for uninterrupted environmental continuity. Even thermal strategies are seamlessly integrated. Kooltherm and PIR insulation boards are concealed behind clean detailing, while Schöck’s Isokorb breaks address structural thermal bridging without visual compromise. The interior, devoid of superfluous décor, is defined by custom-built furniture and integrated storage solutions. The architectural language avoids distraction. Hidden doors, continuous surfaces, and a cohesive palette reinforce an atmosphere of visual calm. Lighting by Eden Design and Vibia and a restrained selection of fixtures by Ceadesign and Agape extend the project’s minimal ethos down to the finest details. Atmosphere, Experience, and Meaning Banánka is not a house that demands attention but rewards observation. It is a house built not for display but for living, emphasizing temporal rhythms and sensory engagement. The melancholic quality of the site, its muted light, rustling leaves, and distant water, finds a counterpoint in the solidity of the architecture. This structure does not compete with its surroundings but holds space for them. Its spatial generosity is not measured in size but in porosity. Each room has a view, a threshold, and a moment of connection. The terrace, with its outdoor kitchen, pond-side dining, and integrated grill, extends the central living space without rupture. The wellness area, complete with a sauna and plunge pool, serves as a domestic ritual space, bridging comfort and nature through proximity to the stream. The name “Banánka,” a local term for a female resident of Banka, anchors the project in place and culture. There is a poetic continuity here. The architecture is distinctly modern but unmistakably rooted in its geographic and linguistic context. Banánka stands as a model of how regionalism can be reinterpreted not through imitation but through intention. Banánka House Plans Site Plan | © Paulíny Hovorka Architects Floor Plan | © Paulíny Hovorka Architects Axonometric View | © Paulíny Hovorka Architects Banánka House Image Gallery About Paulíny Hovorka Architects Paulíny Hovorka Architects is a Slovak architectural studio based in Banská Bystrica, founded by Martin Paulíny and Braňo Hovorka in 1998. The studio is known for its context-sensitive designs that prioritize material honesty, spatial clarity, and sustainable construction. Their work spans residential and commercial projects, focusing on integrating architecture into its natural and urban surroundings through thoughtful concepts and precise detailing. Credits and Additional Notes Lead Architects: Braňo Hovorka, Martin Paulíny Co-author: Natália Galko Michalová Design Team: Veronika Ivanovičová, Lenka Kopfová, Radovan Krajňak Structural Engineer: Pavol Hubinský Landscape Architect: Martin Sučič Gross Floor Area: 300 m² Usable Floor Area: 244 m² Plot Size: 2,338 m² Monolithic Structure Contractor: Texo Group  Windows and Glazed Walls Supplier: KOYA Windows  Bespoke Furniture: DL INTERIER Bathroom and Kitchen Supplier: Design Club  Built-in Grill Supplier: Gargo Furniture and Lighting Supplier: Triform Factory

UK-based engineering equipment supplier Kingsbury and metal additive manufacturing company Additure have been appointed by the UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) to supply additive manufacturing technology and expertise as part of the UK’s ongoing efforts to advance fusion energy research. The partnership will support the development of components designed to endure the extreme conditions within fusion reactors, with a focus on innovative materials and design approaches. A key area of focus involves the use of tungsten—layered with materials such as copper—to achieve the necessary durability. To support this work, Kingsbury and Additure will deliver and install a Nikon SLM Solutions SLM 280 2.0 Laser Powder Bed Fusion (LPBF) system at UKAEA’s facilities. “We are excited to support the team at the UKAEA as they scale, not just with the SLM 280’s LPBF capability, but with all the key elements of the AM ecosystem to make this a robust manufacturing solution for UKAEA and the UK’s fusion programme,” said Will Priest, Business Development Manager at Additure. The SLM 280 Production Series system. Image via Nikon SLM Solutions. About UKAEA The UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) is the United Kingdom’s national fusion energy research organisation. It operates as an executive non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. A key part of its mission involves fostering industrial fusion capability by working with manufacturers and supply chains to introduce and scale the technologies required for commercial fusion energy deployment. “The UKAEA aims to develop the commercialisation of additive manufacturing and support UK industry in the transition into the fusion energy sector. We conduct the complex areas of research and development to the point where it becomes commercially viable, the advice and support of our supply chain is hugely valuable in expediting this process,” said Roy Marshall, Head of Operations for Fabrication, Installation, and Maintenance at UKAEA. JET interior with super imposed plasma. Image via UK Atomic Energy Authority. Additure’s Role and Technology Contribution At the center of this initiative is the SLM 280 2.0, an LPBF system designed for high-performance applications, including the development of refractory metals. The system offers build speeds up to 80% faster than single-laser alternatives and includes integrated safety features such as a powder sieve module and system cooling enhancements. Beyond equipment delivery, Additure is also providing comprehensive technical training to UKAEA’s research, materials, and design teams. This includes detailed guidance on machine setup, build optimization, and specialized functions—such as a heated reduced build volume. “The applications training from Additure will provide our engineers with new ways to design some of the complex structures required by fusion and allow them to do this using some of the most challenging materials to work with. For additive manufacture to contribute to fusion energy, more designers need to think, ‘What process is most suitable for the desired thermal or structural performance?’ And ‘how do I create a design that is best optimised for additive manufacture?’”, said Mr. Marshall. Advancing Laser Beam Shaping 3D Printing  Given its notable advantages for industrial metal 3D printing, beam shaping capabilities are being developed and commercialized by several players in the research and LPBF 3D printing spheres. In 2024, German research organization Fraunhofer Institute for Laser Technology ILT showcased its new 3D printing beam shaping technology. Working with the Chair of Technology of Optical Systems (TOS) at RWTH Aachen University, the new platform, the Fraunhofer team is developing a test system for investigating complex laser beam profiles.  This platform can create customized beam profiles for laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) 3D printing, enhancing part quality, process stability and productivity, while minimizing material waste.  In 2022, Equispheres and Aconity3D used laser beam-shaping 3D printing to achieve build rates nearly nine times higher than industry norms. Equispheres’ NExP-1 aluminum powder was used with Aconity3D’s AconityMIDI+ LPBF 3D printer to unlock speeds exceeding 430 cm3/hr for a single laser.  The system was modified to employ a PG YLR 3000/1000-AM laser with beam-shaping capabilities. By using a shaped beam over a zoomed Gaussian profile, the team reduced overheating and mitigated spatter formation during high-speed 3D printing.  Take the 3DPIReader Survey — shape the future of AM reporting in under 5 minutes. Who won the 2024 3D Printing Industry Awards? Subscribe to the3D Printing Industry newsletter to keep up with the latest 3D printing news. You can also follow us on LinkedIn, and subscribe to the 3D Printing Industry Youtube channel to access more exclusive content. Featured image shows JET interior with super imposed plasma. Image via UK Atomic Energy Authority.

Subscribe to Nintendo Life on YouTube813k Sega has positioned itself as a staunch early supporter of the Switch 2, offering up three key titles on day one and three more to follow later on. While we've yet to experience the full lineup, Sega invited us to check out a trio of launch-period titles in what marked our first extended experience with the Switch 2 completely untethered from any kind of demo kiosk. Wild stuff! But we're not here to talk about the hardware; more on that will come soon enough. This is all about the games, so let's kick things off with Kiryu...Subscribe to Nintendo Life on YouTube813kWatch on YouTube Yakuza 0: Director's Cut Image: Sega Upon booting up this Director’s Cut of this 2015 game, the first thing that strikes us is just how clean it looks. Sure, we’ve had some really great-looking games on the original Switch, but there was something about Yakuza 0 that screams premium. It may simply be because we've played the game extensively before, and usually when you move from PS4 to original Switch, you expect some pretty heavy visual compromises. On Switch 2, there’s nothing of the sort. Yakuza 0 looks exactly like it does on the PS4; perhaps even better, with razor-sharp image clarity and exceptionally smooth frame rate. It’s glorious. The single-player portion of the demo stars fan-favourite Goro Majima. The lengthy dialogue sequences within the main story gave us a good sense of how voice actor Matthew Mercer (Ganondorf, Leon Kennedy) comes across as the voice of Majima, and honestly, he’s pretty good! Ultimately, while we suspect many of you will stick to the original Japanese dub, we reckon you’ll be pretty happy with the English version, too. Images: Sega If you’ve played Yakuza Kiwami on Switch (or really any entry before the series shifted to a turn-based RPG setup with Yakuza: Like A Dragon), you’ll feel right at home here. Once we were let loose to explore the immediate environment of Sotenbori, we were free to take on gang members skulking in the shadows, chat to NPCs to initiate side quests, and – unfortunately – get absolutely annihilated in a shakedown fight. The aforementioned side quest in this case was the ‘Be My Boyfriend!’ mission, which sees Majima play the role of doting partner to a girl who just wants to impress her father. It’s a hilarious sequence completely devoid of any combat, but the dialogue really highlights just how funny the series can be. In fact, if you make the right dialogue choices, the father winds up begging you to be his daughter’s boyfriend for real! We also looked at the new multiplayer mode, Red Light Raid. It’s a pretty simple setup: you and up to four friends combine forces to take on hordes of enemies, and that’s really it. Once you complete the designated number of waves based on your chosen difficulty, you’ll face off against a boss character, which is usually one of the notable characters from the main game. It’s chaotic, it’s fun, but it’s also ultimately pretty shallow. Images: Sega The number of playable characters was quite limited in the demo, but in addition to the likes of Kiryu, Majima, Kuze, and Nishikiyama, you’ve also got deeper cuts like the utterly outrageous Ginger Chapman, whose slow, hulking frame is compensated for with a deadly melee weapon. It’s a neat little mode which you can also play solo if you desire, but we suspect most players will be sticking to the excellent story mode, which remains one of the very best in the Yakuza series. RAIDOU Remastered: The Mystery of the Soulless Army Image: Sega We have to admit, Raidou Remastered isn’t the best game to demo over the course of 20 minutes or so. That said, our time with it did at least give us a taste of what to expect in terms of exploration, interactions, and combat. The demo mostly took place within the town of Tsukudo-cho, home of the Narumi Detective Agency headquarters. We were free to explore and chat with the locals, but some of them didn’t have a whole lot to say. This is where you’re able to break out one of your demon companions and read characters’ minds. This way, you can get a sense of what it is they’re after and thus help them out accordingly. Moving around the town revealed that the camera was essentially fixed in place, shifting perspective whenever protagonist Raidou (pronounced ‘Ry-doo’, by the way) would turn onto a different street. There were a few instances where the change in camera angle felt a little off and it was quite difficult to judge which direction we had to go – it’s no classic Resident Evil, that’s for sure. Still, wandering about the town was fun, and the accompanying music was oddly serene and comforting. Images: Sega The action really kicks into gear when you deliver some wine to the ‘Big Tarrasque’ creature dwelling within the Daidouji Residence basement. Once this weird turtle/ape hybrid decides Raidou would be perfect pairing with the wine, a battle commences. Unlike most Shin Megami Tensei games, Raidou allows you to run around the arena and attack at will, with different moves mapped to the various Switch 2 face buttons. Actions such as attacking an enemy, exploiting weaknesses, or even healing will build up Spirit during the battle. Once you gain enough Spirit, you can unleash a powerful Spirit Slash attack with ‘A’ + ‘X’, hitting all enemies within the area. Initiating the move results in a brief, slick cutscene in which Raidou unleashes a wave of fire with a few quick strokes of his sword. It’s pretty awesome. Images: Sega All in all, the battle mechanics feel intuitive and responsive, and should appeal to those who are intrigued by the world of Shin Megami Tensei but otherwise put off by the often daunting turn-based mechanics. Here, the action feels a bit more akin to something you might find in a modern Final Fantasy game. It’s a nice change of pace, and we can’t wait to see how it develops and evolves as you proceed further into the game. While we barely scratched the surface of Raidou, we're really excited for this one. Yes, the graphics don't exactly scream next-gen, but this is nevertheless an extensive upgrade from the PS2 original. Definitely one to keep an eye on. Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S Image: Sega We suspect that the biggest question mark for Sega fans might well be Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S, a game that, on the surface at least, looks like more of the same for another £35 on Switch 2. What exactly is the point? Well, to be honest, this one is definitely more likely to appeal to those who have yet to dive into the series, but the chaos involved with the new Doubles Mode might just be enough to convince die-hard fans to double-dip. Doubles Mode essentially has you and a friend team up to take on your opponents. The twist, however, is that you’re not in charge of your own Puyo Puyo / Tetris board each, but rather you’re working together on a single board. This means that you have to actually communicate with each other to determine where each player will place their piece. Get it right, and you can accomplish some pretty devastating combos. It’s very easy to mess up, however, and this is down to friendly collision. Images: Sega You see, you’d think that you’d be able to move your pieces wherever you want, regardless of where your friend is positioned on the board. Not so. You actually have to move out of each other’s way, and if you happen to collide with each other, the resulting confusion will cost precious time. It’s pretty chaotic and we weren’t sure what to make of it at first, but as long as you maintain communication and decide who’s doing what, it’s certainly manageable and even quite enjoyable. What’s not enjoyable, however, are the optional mouse controls – emphasis on ‘optional’. Granted, we didn’t get a whole lot of time with the game (20 minutes or so), so there’s every chance that a bit more time will yield a more positive impression of the controls, but it just felt weird. Essentially, moving the Joy-Con around on a surface will cause the corresponding Tetris block or Puyo blob to move in the same direction – much like a desktop cursor on a PC. Clicking ‘R’ allows you to rotate your piece, but the real kicker is how you perform a hard drop. Normally, if you’re using a standard D-pad setup, this would be accomplished by tapping up; so you line up your piece with left and right and tap up to hard drop – easy. With the mouse mode, however, you have to twist your thumb around to rest on the analogue stick, then pull it down. Images: Sega It’s such a bizarre setup, we couldn’t properly get to grips with it in the time that we had, and ultimately we just switched back to standard controls so we could focus on the game itself. If we’re able to remap controls and have the hard drop function mapped to a face button or even ‘ZR’, this might prove a compelling control method. As it is, it’s not something we can recommend. Ultimately, Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S is more of the same, and we imagine there are fans out there just waiting to get this downloaded on the new console. Newcomers have a lot to dive into, including Adventure Mode, Skill Battle, and more, but for those more casual fans who already own Puyo Puyo Tetris 2 elsewhere, we get the impression you won't be missing out on too much if you skip this one at launch. Another one of those block-dropping feats So that's yer lot for now! Overall, we're pretty pleased with Sega's upcoming output for the Switch 2. None of these games will do much to convince the layman that the system is a massive step up from its predecessor in terms of raw power, but if you're someone who values a strong cadence of great games early in a console's lifespan, you'll like what Sega's got waiting in the wings. Huge thanks to Sega for the opportunity to check these out. Yakuza 0 and Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S will be joined by Sonic X Shadow Generations on 5th June, while RAIDOU Remastered will launch shortly after on 19th June. Two Point Museum is "2025" and Virtua Fighter 5 REVO doesn't have a date yet. Which of these games currently takes your fancy? Will you be grabbing Yakuza or Puyo Puyo Tetris 2S on launch day? Let us know your thoughts with a comment down below. It's close, though Switch information also revealed Related Games See Also Share:0 1 Nintendo Life’s resident horror fanatic, when he’s not knee-deep in Resident Evil and Silent Hill lore, Ollie likes to dive into a good horror book while nursing a lovely cup of tea. He also enjoys long walks and listens to everything from TOOL to Chuck Berry. Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment... Related Articles Nintendo Switch 2 Final Tech Specs Have Been Confirmed GameChat has a "significant impact on system resources" Nintendo Apologises For "Error" With Mention Of Switch 2 VRR TV Support "The incorrect information was initially published" 12 Switch Games Are Getting Free Switch 2 Upgrades, Here's What You Can Expect Nintendo's free updates arrive next month Here's Your First Look At Pokémon Scarlet And Violet On Switch 2 What? ScaVi is evolving!

Last month, the UK’s highest court unanimously ruled that a woman is defined by biological sex under equalities law. The court sided with campaign group For Women Scotland, which brought a case against the Scottish Government, arguing that sex-based protections should only apply to people that are born female. While the judgement does not remove trans people’s protection from discrimination under the 2010 Equality Act, among the outcomes of the ruling are bans on trans women from using women’s toilets and trans men using men’s toilets. All public buildings must provide single-sex toilet facilities following the ruling.Advertisement Writing in an open letter addressed to LGBTQ+ architects, planners, engineers and others, which was shared exclusively with the AJ, the UK’s largest built environment institutions said they acknowledged concerns raised over the court’s decision. The professional membership bodies also made promises to create an inclusive built environment in the letter, which reiterated ‘protections and provisions’ that ‘remain firmly in place’ despite the ruling. The six bodies said: ‘We acknowledge the recent Supreme Court judgment, and we need time to fully consider its implications [but] Our determination to foster an inclusive sector remains unchanged’. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Queerscapes (@_queerscapes) The response comes after the LGBTQ+ and trans-founded platform Queerscapes argued in a letter dated 18 April that its members were ‘deeply concerned and worried’ by the gender ruling. Queerscapes, at the same time, called for the professional bodies to show ‘clarity and courage’ on the issue. Writing in the open letter, the group said: ‘The recent UK Supreme Court ruling, redefining “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 as “biological sex,” has left many of us fearful.Advertisement ‘The ruling opens the door to exclusion’ ‘While legal protections for trans people under “gender reassignment” remain, the ruling opens the door to exclusion — from spaces, services, and workplaces — at a time when hate and hostility are already rising. ‘Our institutions must act decisively to support the trans and gender-diverse professionals in our sector.’ The letter in response to Queerscapes was signed by the RIBA, the Chartered Institute of Building, Institution of Civil Engineers, The Landscape Institute, the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, and the Royal Town Planning Institute. The RIBA and joint bodies admitted in their letter that they were unable to publish data on trans and gender-diverse members until they are ‘confident that its collection and publication will not put any member at risk’. This was in response to Queerscapes calling for action following a 2022 memorandum on inclusion and diversity. Other commitments made in 2022 on EDI included improving understanding of gender transition from education into employment, and training on EDI. This was part of a 45-point action plan agreed by the six bodies. Letter in response to Queerscapes Thank you for your letter dated 18 April. In 2022, we signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) and its associated action plan as a demonstration of our collective commitment to creating a built environment sector that is inclusive and supportive of our entire membership. We are dedicated to ensuring that all members, regardless of their personal characteristics, thrive in this environment. We acknowledge the recent Supreme Court judgment, and we need time to fully consider its implications. Our determination to foster an inclusive sector remains unchanged. The MoU is set to expire this summer, and we expect all original signatories to re-sign, alongside welcoming new signatories, to further cement our commitment to supporting all our members. Consistent and robust data collection is the bedrock of our commitment. Since signing the MoU, we have agreed a consistent set of data collection practices, which include gathering data on trans and gender-diverse individuals. We intend to publish this data; however, we are currently working on improving our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems to ensure that the data we collect can be stored safely and accurately. We will share the data once we are confident that its collection and publication will not put any member at risk. Additionally, we have provisions and protections in place for members and staff that ensure everyone is treated with dignity and respect. These policies remain firmly in place. At this time, we do not offer member services or benefits based on gender identity, and we have no plans to introduce such services. However, in terms of Continuing Professional Development (CPD), we are committed to promoting the use of the Inclusive Design Overlay across our membership and beyond. This framework is designed to ensure that spaces are inclusive and welcoming for all, including trans individuals. We recognise that some members and built environment professionals may be feeling increased levels of vulnerability and concern. Please be assured that we remain steadfast in our commitment to creating inclusive professions and, by extension, inclusive places and spaces. Discrimination of any kind has no place in society, and we will continue to do our part in eradicating it. Thank you again for reaching out. Members of the professional institutions with additional questions or concerns are encouraged to get in touch with their respective organisation. Yours sincerely, Chartered Institute of Building Institution of Civil Engineers The Landscape Institute Royal Institute of British Architects Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors Royal Town Planning Institute

Carrie Pallardy, Contributing ReporterMay 21, 20258 Min Readrudi1976 via Alamy StockNick Lucius has spent his entire career in government service. He has put his skills as an attorney and data scientist to work in several roles with the City of Chicago. Last year, he was confirmed as the city’s CIO, heading up the newly formed Department of Technology and Innovation.  “I’m proud of what we're doing in Chicago … saving significant amounts of money by being more efficient,” Lucius tells InformationWeek. “We’ve saved $6 million already in 2025, which is a significant part of our budget. But [we did] so without a reduction in the delivery of services to humans.”  He talks about how he built his career and how he is aiming to increase both efficiency and access to services for Chicagoans.  Law and Computer Science Lucius plays guitar and piano. His early career ambitions focused on music but shifted to politics and government. During his undergraduate years at Ohio State University, he worked for the Ohio Statehouse.  “I was just really interested in the power of the justice system and how just how much having an advocate can really make a difference in that,” Lucius shares.  That interest led him to law school. He attended DePaul University, a choice that was driven by its location. “Chicago, I chose for the city. I absolutely love the city,” he recalls.  Related:Lucius earned joint degrees in law and computer science. His original intention was to pursue patent law with an interest in technology issues.  Nick LuciusWhile his career took a different path, his skills in computer science and law have served him well. “If I learned anything in the law, it was that having someone articulating as an advocate on behalf of a cause can do so much to move us toward progress,” he says.Armed with the ability to shape a narrative and champion a cause, Lucius has seen how technology can breathe life into those visions.  “On the technology side, I can then build and say, ‘OK, now we’re going to implement a system ... We’re going to create something. We’re going to put something out there that wasn’t out there before to move this cause forward,’” he says.  A Career in Government Lucius had those plans for patent law, but he graduated around the time of the Great Recession that began in 2007. Law firms weren’t hiring. But, as it turns out, the City of Chicago was. He got his start as assistant corporation counsel in the city’s Department of Law, focusing on foreclosures and abandoned buildings. “As soon as I started doing that, I forgot about everything I went to school for, and I spent about 10 years in litigation trying to help out the people of Chicago,” he says.  Related:After all those years of litigation, Lucius’s interest in technology began to resurface. “I also noticed that in my legal cases I had to do a lot of digging into city data systems and city technology systems in order to get my evidence,” he recalls.  He saw how modernizing city systems and connecting those systems across departments could make a big difference in the lives of residents. That spark got him back to his technology roots. He started taking on community projects and volunteer coding classes to hone his skills.  That reinvigorated interest in technology lead to roles as a data scientist with the city and then chief data officer and CTO with the office of the mayor.  Spearheading a New Department As Lucius moved through each of these roles and now in his position as CIO, he increasingly took on leadership responsibilities.  “I’m a builder by nature. And so I always love to roll up my sleeves and get into a problem,” says Lucius. “I find myself in the role now more often of … people [looking] to me for inspiration … leadership and vision.”  As the head of the department of technology and innovation, Lucius and his team have responsibilities for a vast array of systems that support the third-most populous city in the country.  Related:“We do so much: everything from supply the drinking water, pumping billions of gallons to not just Chicago but 125 cities in the area coming from Lake Michigan. Two major airports, international airports, 250 square miles of roads and sewers,” Lucius notes. “What we do is so massive, and one of the first orders of business when we got started was, we have a lot to just maintain and support.” Lucius leads a team of 75 people, which is slated to grow to 150 by the end of the year. In addition, he works with a large network of vendors and consultants that support the city’s IT systems.  The team is organized into different groups: planning, delivery, support, and cybersecurity. “When someone comes and says, ‘Hey, Nick, I need some help. I need a new website. I need a new app. I need you to solve this problem for me.’ We’re going to plan it. We’re going to build it. We’re going to deliver it. After that, we’ll support it, and we’ll make it’s safe and secure.” Lucius spends the majority of a typical day, up to 75% of it, in collaboration spaces. He is talking to team members, attending events, working to ideate. The remainder of his day is spent thinking about the future.  “What’s happening with AI? Where are we going with quantum computing here in Chicago? What’s our innovation play right now?” he asks.  As any CIO knows, not every day is a typical one. Systems go down. Fires have to be put out. Lucius was just a few months into the CIO role when the CrowdStrike global IT outage hit last year, impacting Windows machines across the city.  “Those kinds of days, when they come … it could be the only thing I do from the moment I wake up until the moment I go to sleep,” says Lucius.  While days like this are inevitable, Lucius and his team still have a bigger picture and goals in sight. The more time it takes to access a benefit, the harder it is for the people who need that benefit the most to get it. He is hoping to use technology to increase equity and accessibility to government services.  “I want to see a decrease in the difficulty that it takes a person with a disability to apply for everything from a disability sticker for the car so that they can park close to their home, to apply for social benefits programs, whether that’s financial assistance or assistance with something in their home or something necessary for their life,” he offers as an example.  Challenges in Government  CIOs across industries share many of the same responsibilities and challenges, but there are sector-specific nuances, too. Lucius notes how much scrutiny public sector CIOs face compared to their private sector peers.  “Even publicly traded organizations don’t quite have the amount of scrutiny and attention that that a major government institution gets,” he contends.  And there is a reason for that pressure. Transparency is important. Delivering government services to citizens is essential. That responsibility is one of the biggest worries on Lucius’s mind.  Major government technology projects often get a lot of time and money, and yet they might fail. “You don’t have to look too far to see examples,” says Lucius. “When Healthcare.gov launched, it didn’t work.” He believes that it isn’t enough to have a great idea, get it funded, and get it launched. He sees the need to constantly evaluate projects to ensure they are actually successful.  “Success is when something works better for Chicagoans and something works better for a human being on the other end, and they get that benefit,” he emphasizes.  How should young people with ambitions in technology and government be thinking about these challenges, particularly during such a turbulent time? Lucius still wants to see people chase their dreams, but he cautions that they need something to latch onto in such a high-pressure field.  “Maybe [you] have family or [you] have personal experience where what we do here helped or maybe … you’ve just seen the benefit play out for human beings out there in the world,” says Lucius. “If you can latch on to that, that’s something you need in order to get through some of these experiences.”  A Reimagined Future Lucius sees people in the government technology space at a crossroads. They are faced with the major pressures of today’s societal and financial upheaval and the promises of delivering on new technology, like AI.  “All these things … have the potential to make things faster and more efficient, but then also bring the dangers of widening inequities and creating divides in society,” says Lucius. “We sit at the cusp of the reimagination of what it is to govern and what it is to oversee the provision of benefits in this society. And I want government technologists to recognize that … we can own that.” Lucius wants to bring services and benefits to the people of Chicago more efficiently without reducing those services. “We talk a lot about government efficiency these days,” he says. “I think Chicago is a great example.” About the AuthorCarrie PallardyContributing ReporterCarrie Pallardy is a freelance writer and editor living in Chicago. She writes and edits in a variety of industries including cybersecurity, healthcare, and personal finance.See more from Carrie PallardyWebinarsMore WebinarsReportsMore ReportsNever Miss a Beat: Get a snapshot of the issues affecting the IT industry straight to your inbox.SIGN-UPYou May Also Like

May 21, 2025Ravie LakshmananMalware / Windows Security Russian organizations have become the target of a phishing campaign that distributes malware called PureRAT, according to new findings from Kaspersky. "The campaign aimed at Russian business began back in March 2023, but in the first third of 2025 the number of attacks quadrupled compared to the same period in 2024," the cybersecurity vendor said. The attack chains, which have not been attributed to any specific threat actor, commence with a phishing email that contains a RAR file attachment or a link to the archive that masquerades as a Microsoft Word or a PDF document by making use of double extensions ("doc_054_[redacted].pdf.rar"). Present within the archive file is an executable that, when launched, copies itself to the "%AppData%" location of the compromised Windows machine under the name "task.exe" and creates a Visual Basic Script called "Task.vbs" in the Startup VBS folder. The executable then proceeds to unpack another executable "ckcfb.exe", runs the system utility "InstallUtil.exe," and injects into it the decrypted module. "Ckcfb.exe," for its part, extracts and decrypts a DLL file "Spydgozoi.dll" that incorporates the main payload of the PureRAT malware. PureRAT establishes SSL connections with a command-and-control (C2) server and transmits system information, including details about the antivirus products installed, the computer name, and the time elapsed since the system startup. In response, the C2 server sends auxiliary modules to perform a variety of malicious actions - PluginPcOption, which is capable of executing commands for self-deletion, restarting the executable file, and shutting down or rebooting the computer PluginWindowNotify, which checks the name of the active window for keywords like password, bank, WhatsApp, and perform appropriate follow-up actions like unauthorized fund transfers PluginClipper, which functions as a clipper malware by substituting cryptocurrency wallet addresses copied to the system's clipboard with an attacker-controlled one "The Trojan includes modules for downloading and running arbitrary files that provide full access to the file system, registry, processes, camera and microphone, implement keylogger functionality, and give attackers the ability to secretly control the computer using the remote desktop principle," Kaspersky said. The original executable that launches "ckcfb.exe" simultaneously also extracts a second binary referred to as "StilKrip.exe," which is a commercially available downloader dubbed PureCrypter that has been used to deliver various payloads in the past. It's active since 2022. "StilKrip.exe" is designed to download "Bghwwhmlr.wav," which follows the aforementioned attack sequence to run "InstallUtil.exe" and ultimately launch "Ttcxxewxtly.exe," an executable that unpacks and runs a DLL payload called PureLogs ("Bftvbho.dll"). PureLogs is an off-the-shelf information stealer that can harvest data from web browsers, email clients, VPN services, messaging apps, wallet browser extensions, password managers, cryptocurrency wallet apps, and other programs like FileZilla and WinSCP. "The PureRAT backdoor and PureLogs stealer have broad functionality that allows attackers to gain unlimited access to infected systems and confidential organization data," Kaspersky said. "The main vector of attacks on businesses has been and remains emails with malicious attachments or links." Found this article interesting? Follow us on Twitter  and LinkedIn to read more exclusive content we post. SHARE    