Zero Rss

Leak Exposes Germany Forcing Social Media To Boost State Propaganda, Bury Dissent

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

European elites are reeling from the information revolution they failed to suppress. A fresh leak exposes Germany’s state media regulators plotting a new law to compel social media platforms to automatically boost “reliable” and “trusted” mainstream outlets in their algorithms.

Sold as a defense of “media plurality” against disinformation, this scheme reveals the ugly truth: after brute-force censorship ignited a global backlash and helped propel Elon Musk’s purchase of X, authorities are now seeking to engineer the feeds themselves to favor their approved narratives while sidelining dissent.

This marks a shift from overt suppression to insidious manipulation. What began as panic over losing control has evolved into calculated digital gerrymandering. The awakening—fueled by years of heavy-handed crackdowns—created demand for uncensored spaces. Now, unable to fully extinguish that flame, regulators aim to starve alternative voices of oxygen through algorithmic favoritism.

I can assure you 2 dozen other countries are watching closely to see if Germany can get away with it. If no very visible retaliatory threat or diplomatic intervention is made here by USG, you will not believe the speed at which this cancer will spread.

— Mike Benz (@MikeBenzCyber) May 27, 2026

The internal strategy paper from Germany’s Landesmedienanstalten, the network of state media authorities, outlines plans for a Digital Media State Treaty. It would grant automatic algorithmic preference to selected outlets.

The document remains in preparatory stages but is slated for presentation to politicians imminently. Thorsten Schmiege, head of the regulators and Bavaria’s media authority president, indicated a first draft could arrive this summer.

Critics rightly note the core problem: who defines “reliable” and “trusted”? The same state bodies entangled with public broadcasters that have repeatedly demonstrated bias. This isn’t about plurality; it’s about preserving a monopoly on public discourse as legacy media hemorrhages trust and audience.

Mike Benz, former State Department cyber official and vocal critic of censorship regimes, highlighted the international stakes in a pointed post reacting to the leak. He warned that dozens of other countries are watching closely to see if Germany can get away with it.

Benz stressed the need for visible US retaliatory threat or diplomatic intervention, stating that without it, “you will not believe the speed at which this cancer will spread.” He urged nipping this in the bud by whatever diplomatic, economic, or sanctions means are necessary.

This proposal doesn’t emerge in isolation. It builds directly on the patterns of escalating control seen across Europe. The EU’s “Democracy Shield” and broader Digital Services Act framework already pressure platforms into systemic content demotion under the guise of risk assessments.

Those tools have chilled speech across the continent. Germany’s move represents the next logical escalation: not just removing content, but ensuring state-aligned sources dominate what users actually see.

The EU’s €140 million fine slapped on X for alleged transparency violations formed part of a sustained assault. Musk responded forcefully, pointing to EU commissars’ role in stifling debate that could have mitigated Europe’s self-inflicted wounds.

That fine wasn’t about protecting users—it was punishment for refusing to play ball with narrative gatekeepers.

French President Emmanuel Macron’s calls for draconian measures and a full ‘Ministry of Truth’ apparatus further illustrate the continental appetite for control.

In the UK, London Mayor Sadiq Khan has pushed for a dedicated government disinformation unit, while the Online Safety Act has emerged as a comprehensive censors’ charter.

These developments show how temporary “emergency” powers metastasize into permanent architecture for managing reality.

The Digital Leviathan rose precisely to handle challenges like mass migration criticism and policy failures that elites preferred to keep hidden.

When combined with this algorithmic favoritism, the strategy becomes clear: starve challengers of reach while subsidizing compliant voices through forced visibility.

And then there are also punishments ready, such as debanking, to discourage journalists from stepping outside the approved thresholds.

Barack Obama’s infamous suggestion of a social media Ministry of Truth feels less like hyperbole and more like prophecy when viewing these coordinated efforts.

The backfire was predictable. Heavy censorship created martyrs, exposed hypocrisy, and drove users toward platforms prioritizing free expression. Musk’s acquisition of X exemplified this shift. Now, regulators adapt by gaming the very recommendation systems that exposed their weaknesses.

Advocates for this German law claim it counters “disinformative, polarizing” content. Yet the track record of the “trusted” outlets they seek to elevate undermines that claim entirely. The BBC provides a textbook case, with scandals ranging from manipulated editing exposed in the looming Trump lawsuit to further outrageous actions that continue to erode public confidence.

Public broadcasters aren’t neutral arbiters; they’re funded arms of the establishment view.

Germany’s own state media offers equally damning examples, including the fake AI-generated clip of ICE troops arresting a migrant family and systematic slander campaigns against figures like Charlie Kirk after his assassination.

These aren’t isolated lapses but symptoms of systemic narrative enforcement. When public funding meets ideological capture, journalism dies and propaganda thrives.

This aligns with long-standing critiques: legacy outlets function as extensions of the information state. Their declining relevance stems not from competition alone but from audiences recognizing the disconnect between reported reality and lived experience—particularly on immigration, economics, and cultural transformation.

Boosting them algorithmically won’t restore credibility; it will only highlight their dependence on artificial life support.

Parallel to algorithmic rigging, direct assaults on X continue under familiar banners. UK government schemes to restrict or shutter the platform over Grok’s humorous roasts, alongside outright ban threats, expose the cynicism.

Official claims of “protecting children” crumble under scrutiny, as these efforts target political speech far more than genuine safeguarding.

Spain’s far-left coalition similarly floated limitations, revealing a broader European discomfort with unmoderated conversation.

These pretexts enable deeper control. EU chat control proposals threaten end-to-end encryption, effectively ending private digital communication.

UK moves toward mandatory digital IDs with biometric tracking, combined with age verification theater, form pieces of a surveillance mosaic.

Government censorship of the internet is worse than ever in the UK, with the disinfo unit shifting focus from lockdown skeptics to mass migration critics.

Authoritarianism arrives not with tanks but with logins and compliance portals.

Germany stands at the forefront of this crackdown. Courts contemplating speaking bans against prominent politicians, alongside convictions of ordinary citizens for blunt criticism—like a pensioner penalized for calling a Green minister an “idiot”—signal a nation abandoning its post-war free speech commitments.

This environment makes the algorithmic proposal even more sinister. When the state already criminalizes mild dissent, empowering it to curate digital visibility creates a closed loop of approved thought. Independent voices face compounded marginalization online.

The German initiative forms part of a continent-wide offensive against digital liberty. These measures share a common thread: elites viewing open information flows as existential threats rather than democratic necessities. The result is a managed internet where “safety” justifies surveillance and “plurality” means enforced uniformity.

Thankfully, pushback is mounting. Concepts for a genuinely censorship-resistant internet—emphasizing decentralization, open protocols, and user sovereignty—offer technical pathways beyond centralized control. Legal and political pressure remains essential.

The Trump administration has signaled zero tolerance for European overreach. America stands ready to smash these UK and EU internet crackdowns.

Considerations of travel bans targeting officials enforcing speech restrictions, and actual entry prohibitions against anti-free-speech globalists demonstrate leverage available to free societies.

These actions protect not just American platforms but the principle of open discourse worldwide.

The ultimate solution lies in rejecting the premise that information must be managed by self-appointed State guardians. Platforms succeeding through transparency and user choice expose the fragility of legacy models. Citizens increasingly demand accountability: defund captured public broadcasters, enforce viewpoint neutrality where subsidies exist, and prioritize constitutional protections over bureaucratic comfort.

Continued overreach will accelerate the very trends regulators fear. Each attempt at algorithmic rigging further erodes trust, driving innovation toward decentralized alternatives and reinforcing public skepticism.

The information awakening wasn’t a temporary glitch—it represents a fundamental realignment toward truth over narrative. Musk’s X stands as proof: refusing to bend created the space for genuine debate that elites now scramble to recapture through backdoor algorithmic controls.

Europe’s elites face a choice: adapt to a world where ideas compete freely or double down on control and risk greater backlash. The battle for the digital public square will define the coming decade.

Platforms and citizens prioritizing unfiltered exchange hold the advantage, provided they maintain vigilance against these evolving threats—from the German proposal and EU Democracy Shield to UK child protection pretexts and domestic speech prosecutions.

Free societies thrive on open debate, not engineered consensus. The push to game algorithms in favor of propaganda houses won’t save failing narratives; it will only hasten their irrelevance while empowering alternatives rooted in user trust and technological freedom.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/29/2026 - 03:30

Stealth Technology In A Can Could Make Suicide Drones Invisible

A Turkish defense startup claims it has developed a spray-on radar-absorbing paint coating that could reduce the radar signature of one-way attack drones without the exorbitant costs of traditional stealth materials, a capability once only reserved for major defense primes.

Military and defense news outlet The Defense Blog reports that researcher Yunus İnce, along with colleagues at a small defense research firm, has developed a spray-on radar-absorbent material called "Kürşat 3.0."

A Turkish startup claims it built a spray-on coating that makes drones invisible to radar — and says tests hit 43.2 dB attenuation. No independent verification yet. But if it works, stealth just got a lot cheaper.https://t.co/PTibodzoU2

— The Defence Blog (@Defence_blog) May 24, 2026

The coating reportedly consists of volcanic basalt and pumice and is designed to reduce radar return signals by up to 43 dB.

If independently validated, this would exceed the 20 to 30 dB reduction typically seen with many current radar-absorbent coatings, potentially giving low-cost drone platforms a new, cheap survivability upgrade once reserved for billion-dollar stealth military aircraft programs.

The Defense Blog offered additional color into the importance of this new spray-on radar-absorbent material:

The military logic driving interest in this kind of development is not difficult to follow.

The war in Ukraine transformed the global understanding of what small, cheap unmanned aircraft can accomplish in combat, as both sides demonstrated that drones costing a few hundred to a few thousand dollars could destroy armored vehicles, collapse supply lines, and sustain operational pressure at a scale that conventional artillery and air power struggle to match on the same budget.

The response from defenders has been a rapid expansion of electronic warfare systems, radar-based detection networks, and layered interception capabilities designed to find and destroy drones before they reach their targets.

Reducing a drone's radar signature meaningfully complicates that detection chain at every stage, and doing so through a coating that adds negligible weight and requires no structural modification to the airframe would make the capability accessible to operators using commercially available hardware rather than purpose-built stealth platforms.

Yunus responded on X to The Defense Blog's report, in which he says:

Here is the independent verification you mentioned. Official spectrum analyzer validation from Pamukkale University Electrical Engineering Lab: over 40 dB baseline, 43.2 dB peak attenuation. We are ready for the field.

Here is the independent verification you mentioned. Official spectrum analyzer validation from Pamukkale University Electrical Engineering Lab: over 40 dB baseline, 43.2 dB peak attenuation. We are ready for the field. 🇹🇷 pic.twitter.com/XTqAcPOfbd

— yunus (@yunus50) May 25, 2026

As we've previously stated, the rise of suicide drones will usher in counter-UAS systems, but with inexpensive stealth upgrades likely on the horizon, there will also be a rise in passive acoustic threat detection for the military and critical infrastructure, including data centers and power grids.

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/29/2026 - 02:45

Leftist Party Wants Voting Rights For All Foreigners Who've Lived In Germany For 5 Years

Via Remix News,

Germany’s Left Party is pushing for a major overhaul of the German electoral system by proposing that foreign residents without a German passport be granted voting rights after five years of legal residency.

To achieve this, the Left faction in the Bundestag has submitted a formal application demanding that anyone residing legally in the country for at least five years be permitted to vote in federal elections, irrespective of their nationality.

The move would serve as a major electoral boost for left-wing parties, with foreigners overwhelmingly voting for these parties when given the opportunity. Data from the Federal Statistical Office cited in the motion reveals that over 14 million people living in Germany in 2025 lacked German citizenship, a figure that includes roughly 5 million EU citizens. This foreign population has resided in the country for an average of 15 years. In other words, this pool of potential voters for the left is massive.

The initiative also urges the federal government to collaborate with individual states to implement identical changes for state and municipal elections, according to German news outlet Tagesspiegel. The party argues that the current system suffers from an expanding democratic deficit due to the fact that non-German nationals are systematically blocked from participating in federal, state, and most local elections.

The Left finds this exclusion “intolerable, “ given the democratic principles outlined in the Basic Law, arguing that it ignores the reality of Germany as an “immigration society.”

Addressing potential legal hurdles, the Left Party points out that while the Federal Constitutional Court blocked voting rights for foreigners back in 1990, this stance deserves reconsideration due to shifting global dynamics and the fact that EU citizens have since gained local voting rights. They also highlight a linguistic nuance in the constitution, observing that the Basic Law uses the word “people“ in critical sections rather than explicitly restricting terms to “the German people.”

The proposal, which is officially titled “Introduce voting rights for foreigners,” was initiated by a group of lawmakers including Ferat Koçak and the wider Left Party parliamentary group, with signatures from group leaders Heidi Reichinnek and Sören Pellmann.

This motion continues a long-standing political campaign by the Left Party, which references its own 2014 draft legislation as part of a multi-year effort to expand suffrage.

Recently, Elif Eralp, the party’s top candidate in Berlin, echoed these demands.

This has not even been the most radical demand from the Left. In 2023, then German Interior Minister Nancy Faeser proposed to give asylum seekers the right to vote in local state elections after just six months in Germany. The program, if implemented, would have translated into millions of new voters overnight.

At the time, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party was immediately critical of what it described as an attempt to stack the vote with migrants, releasing a statement that read:

“Interior Minister Faeser (SPD), as the top candidate in the Hessian state elections, is campaigning for local voting rights for all people who have lived in Germany for ‘longer than six months.’ This means that supposed ‘refugees’ from Afghanistan, Syria or Turkey would also be allowed to vote – even without German citizenship.

“The German passport is thus turned into a piece of junk. But above all: Faeser and the SPD want to attract people who have no connection to Germany at all as new groups of voters. This is not surprising, because the locals who are ridiculed as ‘non-migrants’ are running away from (Chanceller Olaf) Scholz’s SPD.”

Under current constitutional rules, federal voting rights are restricted to German citizens aged 18 and older, while Berlin state elections require voters to be at least 16. The only current exception exists at the municipal level, where EU citizens can vote for district parliaments.

In response to such demands, the Federal Ministry of the Interior website states that “Migrants living in the Federal Republic of Germany for many years have the opportunity to become naturalized citizens under German citizenship law. In doing so, they also acquire the right to vote.”

However, the Left faction argues this pathway is insufficient and the requirements for citizenship are too burdensome.

The right has long contended that the left is using mass immigration as a tool to solidify political power. Foreigners are notoriously prone to voting for left-wing parties, with the logic being that more left-wing policies means more immigration for their fellow countrymen and more social welfare benefits for them and their families.

Many of these foreign groups often tend to vote quite conservatively in their own nations while shifting to the left in Western nations, such as the case of the Turkish community in Germany, which has approximately 1.5 million individuals with dual citizenship between Turkey and Germany. Half of these Turks vote for strongman Islamist leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Turkish elections and then shift their vote to the left in Germany.

Read more here...

Tyler Durden Fri, 05/29/2026 - 02:00

NATO Warns Russia's Hybrid War Is Targeting Europe's Energy Grid

Authored by Simon Watkins via OilPrice.com,

• European officials fear Russia’s “grey war” is entering a more dangerous phase, with gas pipelines, electricity interconnectors, offshore networks, and subsea infrastructure increasingly vulnerable to sabotage and cyberattacks.

• Security sources say Moscow is escalating pressure because the Ukraine war is becoming harder to sustain militarily and economically.

• Recent incidents involving Russian-linked vessels and surveillance operations in the Baltic and North Seas have heightened concerns that Europe’s energy grid is becoming a frontline target in the broader confrontation with Russia.

While many may be focusing on the transfer of nuclear weapons from Russia to Belarus on NATO’s northeastern Baltic States border, the bloc's security apparatus is at least as concerned about imminent attacks on the region's energy infrastructure, a senior source who works very closely with the European Union's (E.U.'s) energy security complex exclusively told OilPrice.com last week.

“Russia’s effectively been at war with the West since February 2007 when [Russian President Vladimir] Putin condemned NATO’s expansion to the East, which was followed by a huge cyber-attack against Estonia,” he said. “Then we had the beginning of the land pushback, with Russia’s war on Georgia in 2008, where we [the West] did nothing to dissuade him from further actions Westwards, then the first invasion of Ukraine and annexation on Crimea in 2014, where we did nothing much again [as analysed in full in my latest book on the new global oil market order], and then the second invasion of Ukraine in 2022,” he added. “We’re into the final phase now, in which we’re making a stand, and Russia’s testing how resolved we are,” he underlined.

So, what happens next in terms of Europe’s crucial energy infrastructure?

“We expect hybrid attacks of the sort we’ve seen in recent years, and more direct physical ones, which have also increased in recent months, primarily against gas infrastructure, electricity cables, offshore networks, and control systems,” said the source. “The full array of these measures has already been used by Russia in Ukraine, so they’re ready to roll out whenever Putin wants -- it’s just a question of how far he’s willing to push the boundaries before he thinks we’ll react with true deterrent force,” he added. As also highlighted by the E.U. Institute for Security Studies, there have been several incidents since Russia’s full-blown invasion of Ukraine in 2022 in which undersea energy cables were severed by Russian-affiliated vessels. For example, in December 2024, Russian shadow fleet vessel Eagle S was apprehended by Finnish authorities after severing EstLink 2, a critical electricity interconnector linking Finland and Estonia. The ship had military-grade detection hardware in its hull, indicating a direct, premeditated, and malicious attack on European energy infrastructure. Similarly, a Russian vessel, the Scanlark, was detained by authorities after being caught launching surveillance drones and carrying spying equipment near the Olkiluoto Nuclear Power Station in Finland.

“Subsea electricity interconnectors and gas pipelines in the Baltic and North Seas are also highly vulnerable to the same style of attacks, with the same capabilities also available for the targeting of power grids to trigger cascading regional blackouts across the highly interconnected European electricity grids,” the E.U. source told OilPrice.com last week. Indeed, an attempted dual nature energy-telecommunications hit was tried by Russia within the last couple of months, as revealed by the British Ministry of Defence on 9 April. Three Russian submarines were mapping and surveying vital gas pipelines in the North Sea, and undersea electricity interconnectors vital to trading power with mainland Europe. “This is all part of Russia’s ongoing grey war with the West, focused on Europe right now, which aims to critically undermine us without crossing the boundary that triggers Article 5 and outright war between NATO and Russia,” the source underlined.

The key reason why there has been a surge in the scale and scope of Russia’s grey war in recent weeks is that Putin thinks time is running out for his ‘Special Military Operation’ in Ukraine, according to security sources in Washington and London exclusively spoken to by OilPrice.com last week and exclusively confirmed by a very high-level Moscow-based source in the current Russian Administration. Part of Putin’s belief comes from the burn rate of Russian soldiers on the frontline, with only 70% of those killed now able to be replaced by new recruits. “This is the big problem, because it means that the [recruitment] net will have to be widened to areas that could cause political problems,” said the Moscow source last week. In this context, much of the burden of the war to date has been borne by Russia’s ethnic minorities and those from poor regions, for whom the relatively high military salaries and death benefits are life-changing money for them and their families, whether they live or die. So far, the more affluent, better-connected, and more highly educated ‘middle class’ Russians from the major metropolitan hubs -- specifically Moscow and St Petersburg -- have been largely insulated from the war. But, with Putin’s choice now being either an end to the war on Ukrainian terms or extending recruitment to the previously protected class, this could change, although both possibilities have been prepared for.

On the one hand, Putin said on 9 May that the Ukraine war is ‘coming to an end’ -- the first time in over four years of fighting that he has used this specific phrasing. 

On the other hand, Russia rolled out a unified digital conscription registry last May, which sends draft notices electronically via state portals.

The likelihood of major protests erupting if this system is used across Russia’s major metropolitan hubs may have been foreshadowed by the Kremlin’s drive to isolate the country’s internet, allowing it to suppress the kind of widespread dissent that fuelled the Arab Spring uprisings.

There are three other factors in the ‘why now’ equation for Russia, according to the Washington, London, and E.U. sources, again confirmed by the very highly placed source in Moscow.

• The most immediate catalyst was the unblocking of the €90 billion E.U. package for Ukraine, following the removal from power of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who acted as Putin’s de facto blocking vote on E.U. legislation the Russian premier did not want. Two-thirds of this money is strictly earmarked for spending by Ukraine on hard defence assets rather than just keeping the government afloat. Even without this, Ukraine has dramatically expanded its capabilities of hitting key military and civilian infrastructure targets deep inside Russia for the first time, with repeated hits on key sites connected to its ability to monetise its oil and gas resources by exports. Last year, according to industry figures, Russian oil firms suffered RUB1 trillion roubles (US$12.9 billion) in combined losses across 120 recorded energy facility strikes. But since January alone this year, Russia has already lost over US$7 billion in oil revenue, driven by the prolonged downtime of facilities and steep export reductions from disrupted Baltic Sea shipping hubs like Ust-Luga and Primorsk. Worse still for Putin is that his long-running project to keep U.S. President Donald Trump on its side has backfired as, no longer under the shackles of U.S. arms supply deals, Ukraine is no able to keep hitting any target it wants inside Russia up to 1,200 miles, putting over 70% of the Russian population within Ukraine’s crosshairs. Putin knows that this is only going to get worse, as Ukraine continues to develop the range and accuracy of its own missiles and drones with the funding from the new €90bn package.

• The second reason for Russia stepping up its pressure on the West is that Europe is moving ahead with new sanctions designed to end all imports of Russian gas and oil and cut off Moscow’s access to the financing that supports them. Liquefied natural gas imports will end by the end of this year, natural gas by 30 September next year, and crude oil and petroleum products by the end of next year. To this end, its latest (20th) Sanctions Package, adopted on 23 April, was structured specifically to cut off Russia's financial loopholes and squeeze what remains of its energy revenue. It focuses on eliminating its Shadow Fleet of vessels still transporting Russian oil and gas covertly around the world, and on ending crypto escape routes that allow Russia to use digital assets to circumvent traditional Western banking blocks.

• And the final reason, again an unintended by-product of Putin’s misjudgement in attempting to use Trump for his maximum benefit to Russia, is that because of Europe’s uncertainty now over the U.S. commitment to NATO’s Article 5, it is rearming at pace, at scale, and in size. Even before this current round of military build-up, the chance of Russia defeating a united European military force -- without the U.S. -- was minimal, which is why Moscow has continued to fight a grey war under the boundary that would trigger outright conflict. But European NATO’s membership has expanded since the Ukraine invasion, and commitments to new spending and realised new expenditure have increased dramatically.

In the end, Europe’s energy grid is no longer just infrastructure — it is the front line.

And Russia’s grey war will keep pressing against it until Moscow is convinced.

European officials fear Russia’s “grey war” is entering a more dangerous phase, with gas pipelines, electricity interconnectors, offshore networks, and subsea infrastructure increasingly vulnerable to sabotage and cyberattacks. The West is finally prepared to push back in a way that convinces Putin that he must go no further.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 23:25

US Nuclear Recycling Plant Could Extract 100 Times More Energy From Uranium Fuel

Authored by Georgina Jedikovska via Interesting Engineering,

A US startup has joined forces with the nation's first national laboratory to recycle spent nuclear fuel into energy for fast reactors by using advanced pyroprocessing technology.

New York-based nuclear technology company BLSK Energy announced on May 18 that it had signed a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) in Illinois to commercialize the method.

Used nuclear fuel containers.

Pyroprocessing (or pyrochemical processing) is a high-temperature metallurgical process that could enable the reuse of nuclear fuel. When used with fast reactors, it could extract up to 100 times more energy from uranium.

The company plans to launch a pilot recycling facility by 2034 that would convert nuclear waste into material suitable for advanced fast reactors. "The path ahead is ambitious but achievable," Bruce Landrey, BLSK Energy's managing director and co-founder, said.

Recycling Nuclear Waste

The US has accumulated about 95,000 tonnes (104,000 US tons) of used nuclear fuel. They are currently stored at over 75 locations across the country. However, spent nuclear fuel is radioactive and thermally hot when removed from a reactor.

Moreover, even though up to 96 percent of it is made up of leftover uranium, the main fuel used in nuclear reactors, it also contains radioactive waste products and elements heavier than uranium, like plutonium, which is incredibly hazardous.

While long-delayed plans for the permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel remain unresolved, the nuclear industry faces another challenge in securing enough fuel for future reactors. Limited fuel supplies and rising costs are both major hurdles for advanced reactor development.

To tackle the challenge, BLSK Energy's pilot recycling facility will use pyrochemical processing to convert nuclear waste into usable reactor fuel. The company gained exclusive access to the technology through its agreement with ANL, which in turn, first developed the process.

The deal further gives the firm access to ANL's experienced nuclear reprocessing scientists, engineers, as well as research facilities. "BLSK has the rare opportunity to address the two critical issues facing nuclear power; answering the question, 'what about the waste?' while delivering a reliable cost-effective supply of fuel for advanced reactors," Landrey continued.

A New Fuel Plant

Pyroprocessing uses molten salts and electricity to separate and recover valuable nuclear materials from highly radioactive waste. It is believed to offer improved efficiency and proliferation resistance.

The technology would reduce waste volumes while extracting additional energy from used fuel. When paired with fast reactors, it could reportedly unlock up to 100 times more energy from uranium than traditional reactors.

According to ANL, the technology could provide a long-term supply of affordable uranium fuel. By recycling all actinides, radioactive chemical elements that follow actinium in the Periodic Table, the process could significantly reduce the amount of nuclear waste produced.

It could also lower the time the waste must remain isolated from roughly 300,000 years to 300 years. "Having the IP and facility design as a starting point places our effort at a high level of maturity, improving certainty through reduced technical, regulatory, and investment risk," Landrey concluded in a press release.

ANL's support will be led by Yoon Il Chang, PhD, a senior nuclear project director and ANL distinguished fellow, who created the pyroprocessing technology.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 22:35

Threat Of 2030s Lunar War Has NASA, Elon Musk Racing To Build Major Moon Base

NASA unveiled plans earlier this week for a lunar base as the U.S. finds itself locked in a multi-domain race with China, one that stretches across energy, compute, weapons, drones, trade, rare earths, shipbuilding, and now the Moon.

The next front with Beijing is no longer just about returning humans to the lunar surface. It is about establishing permanent infrastructure, securing access to lunar resources, and eventually determining whether the U.S. or China will set the rules for space in the 2030s and beyond. 

Elon Musk commented on NASA's X release about the new lunar base, saying, "Time to build a major base on the Moon!"

Time to build major base on the Moon! https://t.co/frVoXiV0tn

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 26, 2026

So why the sudden urgency for NASA to establish a lunar base?

A new Mitchell Institute policy report says the U.S. Space Force should prepare to put active-duty Guardians on space stations and eventually on the Moon to counter China's military-led space ambitions.

The paper noted: "With a potential 'in-person' lunar conflict with China as the contextual touchstone, the U.S. must begin a pragmatic, multi-decade effort, leveraging its Space Test Course (STC), as well as partnerships with NASA and commercial space companies, to deliver the skills, tools, and concepts needed for future Title 10 activities to enforce U.S. spacepower-enabling norms and standards." It added, "These efforts will require additional funding from Congress for both U.S. Space Force human spaceflight opportunities and residencies at commercial space stations."

The 22-page policy report frames the Moon as the next great-power battleground, warning that competition over lunar resources, territory, logistics routes, and future space infrastructure could eventually turn into conflict.

"Competition for control of lunar resources and territory will likely reach a tipping point, at which time the modern-day space race could turn into conflict. The anarchic nature of the Moon combined with China's record of belligerent use of hard power yields a predictable future where United States lunar interests are put at risk," the paper warned.

The think tank noted, "U.S. national security, strength, and prosperity are dependent on securing space dominance in ways that require Title 10 authorities, to include space and lunar habitation." 

In other words, astronauts and commercial crews would not have the training, legal authority, or warfighting mandate needed to defend U.S. lunar interests. 

From spy-movie parody Austin Powers ... 

Lunar wars in the 2030s? 

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 22:10

Judge Declines To Block Trump's Order On Mail-In Voting

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

A federal judge on May 28 allowed President Donald Trump's administration to implement an executive order imposing restrictions on mail-in voting.

U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols, based in Washington, rejected a request from Democrats, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), for an injunction against the order.

US President Donald Trump walks towards the Rose Garden for a "Rose Garden Club" dinner in honor of Police Week at the White House in Washington, DC, on May 11, 2026. Photo by Kent NISHIMURA / AFP via Getty Images

Absent an injunction, the federal government would compile lists of U.S. citizens and would coerce states into only allowing people on the lists to register to vote and vote in elections, even though the sources for the list are known to be deficient, plaintiffs argued in court filings.

Nichols disagreed, writing in a 26-page decision that while the order directed federal officials to compile the lists, it "does not mandate any action by a State once a List has been transmitted to it, and in any event, no infrastructure for compilation or transmission of the Lists has been established."

The situation may change if the U.S. Postal Service issues a final rule affecting plaintiffs, or if the government develops lists that erroneously omit certain individuals, the judge said.

"Plaintiffs may, of course, renew their motions if and when those future actions occur," he wrote. "Until then, however, Plaintiffs cannot show that preliminary injunctive relief is warranted."

The development means Trump and the federal government can implement the order, but the case will continue.

Trump signed the order on March 31. It states that only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections and that new measures were necessary to "enhance election integrity" for mail-in ballots, which have become increasingly used in recent years.

It directed the secretary of homeland security to compile lists of adult citizens living in each state and to transmit the lists to each state. It also said that the U.S. Postal Service shall propose new rules specifying that all ballots must be mailed in envelopes marked for elections, and that the service "shall not transmit mail-in or absentee ballots from any individual unless those individuals" are on the citizenship lists.

"The cheating on mail-in voting is legendary. It's horrible what has been going on," Trump said when signing the order. "If you don't have honest voting, you can't have, really, a nation."

Democrats said the order exceeded a president's authority and disrupted state oversight of elections.

"President Trump has tried again and again to rewrite election rules for his own perceived partisan advantage," their complaint said, noting that a similar order from Trump, signed in 2025, has been blocked by courts.

Government lawyers told Nichols in a recent filing that the litigation was premature, given that agencies had not taken any steps to implement the order.

A woman casts her mail-in vote at an official ballot drop box in Washington on Nov. 5, 2024. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 21:45

Visualizing The Beef-Margin Bloodbath Behind Tyson CEO's Exit

Tyson Foods CEO Donnie King is stepping down after five years at the helm of the nation's largest meatpacker, with the stock having languished under his tenure as the company battled some of the worst cattle-market conditions in a generation.

Jeff Schomburger, a long-time Tyson board member, will become president and CEO on October 4. King, a 43-year Tyson veteran, will remain on the board and help with the transition beginning in July.

"The board and I are confident in Jeff Schomburger's ability to lead Tyson Foods into its next chapter of growth," said John Tyson, Chairman of the Board of Tyson Foods.

He added, "The Board looks forward to working with Jeff to drive sustainable growth, enhance shareholder value, and build on the strong momentum Tyson Foods has established."

"Donnie King's long tenure at Tyson Foods, including his leadership as CEO, has strengthened our business and shaped our culture," Tyson said. "We are grateful for his steady guidance and look forward to continuing to leverage his expertise within the Board."

Shares of Tyson have severely underperformed under King's tenure, down around 18% as of Wednesday's close.

King's exit comes after Tyson navigated one of the tightest U.S. cattle markets in decades, which pressured its beef business and contributed to losses in the segment.

There is some good news for Schomburger: The U.S. cattle herd rebuilding phase is underway, as initial 2026 data show a higher year-over-year heifer retention rate, according to Rabobank analysts.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 21:20

Newsom Signs New Election Codes Into Law Ahead Of Statewide Primary

Authored by Kimberly Hayek via The Epoch Times,

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law additions to the election code on Wednesday, which his office says will protect state elections against any attempts of political interference by the Trump administration and its allies ahead of the November midterm elections.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom at a conference in Belem, Para State, Brazil, on Nov. 11, 2025. Mauro Pimentel/AFP via Getty Images

The new law, Senate Bill 73, authored by state Democratic Sens. Sabrina Cervantes and Tom Umberg, prohibits any person - including federal agents - from accessing voter rolls or election technology without a court order. It also restricts law enforcement from disrupting election workers except in public safety emergencies and makes it a crime to knowingly remove voted ballots from the custody of election officials.

Newsom signed the election legislation five days ahead of California's June 2 statewide primary, where a crowded and closely watched governor's race is already underway.

The new law took immediate effect.

"We have to step up, and we have to draw the line. We have to clarify the rules of engagement," Newsom told reporters before signing the legislation. "It's a warning to the folks out there that think they can do the bidding of the Trump administration."

The White House pushed back against allegations from Newsom's office that it would be involved in disrupting "lawful election administration" and sending "armed law enforcement to intimidate voters or steal ballots." Spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said President Donald Trump remains committed to ensuring that all Americans have full confidence in election administration.

Newsom framed the signing as a direct response to what he called "legitimate anxiety" about the administration's actions - some of which he said have already played out in California and across other Democratic-led states. Trump administration officials say they have no plans to send immigration law enforcement agents to polling locations - a concern raised by several Democratic secretaries of state.

Newsom said he was unconvinced by those assurances.

"I expect the worst with Trump because he's done the worst," he said at a news conference Wednesday. He added that "there's no rules anymore with the Trump administration," and that California had to "be prepared for everything."

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles told Vanity Fair last year that any suggestion Trump would deploy the military to suppress voting was "categorically false."

Newsom has called the new law only the first piece of a broader "mosaic" of legislation that his administration plans to advance ahead of the November general election.

The signing of the law comes one week before California's June 2 primary, where high-profile candidates across the state are vying for gubernatorial nominations in a primary season with national implications.

Under California's open primary system, the top two candidates who receive the most votes - regardless of party - advance to the November ballot.

The new law came after a months-long confrontation between state officials and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican running for governor, who in early 2026 seized more than 650,000 ballots from a November 2025 special election on congressional redistricting.

Bianco claimed he was investigating allegations of a vote-count discrepancy, but county election officials and California Attorney General Rob Bonta disputed those claims. The California Supreme Court ultimately ordered Bianco to halt the investigation.

SB 73 directly addresses that by making such ballot seizures a criminal offense going forward.

While Bianco says he is a supporter of the president, he has never been endorsed by Trump. Trump in April endorsed Steve Hilton in the governor's race.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 20:55

Missouri Supreme Court Rejects Challenge To New Congressional Map That Boosts Republicans

Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,

The Missouri Supreme Court on May 27 unanimously rejected a constitutional challenge to Missouri's congressional redistricting plan that the state Legislature approved last year.

The floor of the Missouri Senate is seen during a filibuster in Jefferson City, Mo., on Sept. 12, 2025. Michael B. Thomas/Getty Images

Missouri's delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives currently has six Republicans and two Democrats. The new map, which supporters call the "Missouri First Map," is expected to result in Republicans gaining one seat.

The Show Me state's high court affirmed a circuit court ruling that dismissed a lawsuit filed by the state branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

Missouri argued that Gov. Mike Kehoe, a Republican, had full legal authority to call the extraordinary session of the Missouri General Assembly at which the redistricting plan was approved.

The NAACP contended that Kehoe lacked authority under Article IV, Section 9 of the Missouri Constitution to call the session, the Missouri Supreme Court said in its new opinion.

That state constitutional provision reads: "The governor shall, at the commencement of each session of the general assembly, at the close of his term of office, and at such other times as he may deem necessary, give to the general assembly information as to the state of the government, and shall recommend to its consideration such measures as he shall deem necessary and expedient.

"On extraordinary occasions he may convene the general assembly by proclamation, wherein he shall state specifically each matter on which action is deemed necessary."

The circuit court rejected the NAACP's arguments and determined that this issue was political in nature and should be resolved by the governor, as opposed to the judiciary.

The NAACP appealed, arguing that the circuit court erred in finding for the state and various state officials. The group said Article IV, Section 9, requires that an extraordinary occasion must exist before the governor may use his discretion to convoke the General Assembly and advise legislative action.

The Missouri Supreme Court disagreed.

"The plain language of Article IV, Section 9 gives the governor discretion to determine when an extraordinary occasion has arisen and to call an extraordinary session," the court said.

Contrary to the NAACP's assertions, that constitutional provision "does not include language suggesting the governor's discretion to call an extraordinary session is limited in any way," the court added.

The new ruling came after the Missouri Supreme Court unanimously upheld the state's 2025 redistricting plan on May 12 in separate litigation.

"Drawing maps establishing congressional districts is a political process, involving policy decisions that are political in nature, best left to elected representatives and the citizens of this state, not judges," the state supreme court said at that time.

"Courts are tasked with deciding only the legality, not the prudence, of a congressional district map."

On April 29, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Louisiana v. Callais that race may not be the predominant, overriding reason for how congressional district lines are drawn. The case focused on Louisiana's decision to add a majority-black district after a lower court had said omitting the district would violate the federal Voting Rights Act.

That law generally prohibits race-based discrimination in voting practices. The nation's highest court held that lower courts had been misapplying the non-discrimination provisions of the Voting Rights Act by requiring states "to engage in the very race-based discrimination that the Constitution forbids."

The Callais ruling escalated a nationwide battle, underway since last year, after President Donald Trump urged Republican-controlled state legislatures to protect his party's narrow majority in the U.S. House of Representatives by moving up the redistricting process. Normally, redistricting only takes place after the U.S. census every 10 years.

The Epoch Times reached out for comment on the Missouri Supreme Court's new ruling to the office of Missouri Attorney General Catherine Hanaway and the NAACP. No replies were received by publication time.

Stacy Robinson contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 20:05

Canada Taunts Beijing With Frigate's Taiwan Strait Transit Despite Carney's China Reset

Just days before a high-stakes meeting of Canadian officials with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Ottawa, a Canadian frigate defied Beijing’s explicit warnings and sailed directly through the Taiwan Strait.  

The Halifax-class frigate HMCS Charlottetown pulled off the transit in a rare solo run, without American or other accompanying vessels, bypassing the usual joint patrols with allied nations.

via Royal Canadian Navy

According to a delayed statement from Canada's Department of National Defense spokesperson Andrée-Anne Poulin: "On May 22, 2026, HMCS Charlottetown conducted a routine transit through the Taiwan Strait, which was completed on May 23, 2026."

The provocative maritime maneuver took place just as Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi touched down in Canada for the rare three-day visit - which was the first by a Chinese foreign minister in a decade.  

Ottawa and Beijing have been actively trying to patch up relations. Prime Minister Mark Carney's "new strategic partnership" formed with China early this year has been heralded as a pragmatic reset in Canada-China relations after years of tensions.

Canada is aiming at diversifying its trade amid US tariffs under Trump - including increased bilateral trade, agricultural agreements, currency swaps and energy exports - but while trying to still maintain the relationship with Taiwan, which the CCP views as a violation of their "One China" policy.

And yet, Beijing's economic carrot comes with some obvious geopolitical strings. Just last month, China's ambassador to Canada, Wang Di, warned that the newly minted partnership would be severely harmed if Ottawa kept sending military assets through the strait or allowed parliamentarians to play diplomat in Taiwan.

Clearly Ottawa is refusing to bow to Beijing's maritime definitions. Here's what Conservative foreign affairs critic Michael Chong - who recently ignored Beijing's warnings to meet with Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te, had to say:

"I think the government had to signal that it wasn’t going to comply with Beijing’s unreasonable demand," Chong said.

Canadian MPs and senators have long visited Taiwan, including numerous meetings with the president and foreign minister. But this year their trips to Taiwan have been cut short, with Canada showing a quiet willingness to "de-conflict" high-profile visits when they overlap with China diplomacy. 

China has made perfectly clear that they regard the Taiwan Strait as "internal waters" and, in practice, they claim sovereign jurisdiction over all the waters and islands inside the 10-dash line. pic.twitter.com/foAR7545dJ

— Will Schryver (@imetatronink) May 28, 2026

Taiwan's envoy to Ottawa recently warned that Canada's burgeoning attachment to China could put them in a vulnerable position and lead to "trade weaponization" by the CCP. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 19:40

Spencer Pratt Surges As Karen Bass Odds Wobble In Final Days Before LA Mayor Primary

As the June 2nd primary approaches in Los Angeles, prediction markets are showing a notable shift in the Los Angeles mayoral race: incumbent Karen Bass's odds have been all over the place - recently dropping sharply - while challenger Spencer Pratt has seen his implied probability climb.

According to the latest Polymarket snapshot, Bass sits at 59% to win the election outright, down from higher levels above 70% seen earlier in the week. Pratt has risen to 21%, with Nithya Raman at 20% and minor candidates under 1%.

//--> //--> Will Karen Bass win the 2026 Los Angeles mayoral election?
Yes 59% · No 42%
View full market & trade on Polymarket

Similar movements appear on Kalshi, where Bass is around 61% (down roughly 7 points recently) and Pratt near 23%.

What's Driving the Shift?

The volatility reflects a tightening race highlighted by fresh polling and widespread dissatisfaction with conditions in Los Angeles. The latest UC Berkeley/LA Times Poll from May 19-24 shows Bass at 26%, Raman at 25%, and Pratt at 22% among likely voters. Raman and Pratt each gained ground since March, while Bass remained relatively flat. Other surveys from Emerson and Cygnal have shown Pratt surging in recent weeks.

Pratt, best known from the reality show The Hills, entered the race after losing family property in the Palisades Fire. His campaign has focused heavily on strict enforcement against homelessness encampments, mandatory treatment for addiction, government audits, and accountability for billions spent on homelessness and recovery efforts. He has been a vocal critic of what many see as the mishandling of the Palisades Fire response under Bass.

Bass continues to tout measurable progress, including an 18% reduction in street homelessness, drops in violent crime, and efforts to boost housing and film production. However, many voters remain frustrated with visible issues such as persistent encampments, high housing costs, and post-fire recovery challenges. Her approval ratings have been underwater in some surveys.

Adding to the optics today, Governor Gavin Newsom formally endorsed Bass, praising her record. The last-minute endorsement, coming just five days before the primary, has raised eyebrows among some observers who see it as a sign of desperation from the establishment to prop up the incumbent.

What's Next...

Los Angeles uses a two-round system: the top two vote-getters from the June 2 primary advance to a November 3 runoff if no one exceeds 50%. Bass is still heavily favored to advance and win a runoff thanks to incumbent advantages, name recognition, and the city's Democratic lean. Yet a strong showing by Pratt or Raman could set up a more competitive general election.

Pratt has raised over $3.2 million recently, including $2.7 million in a single reporting period, largely from small donors (LA Times on fundraising). His media savvy and outsider message have energized voters who feel ignored by the political establishment. Low turnout in the primary could favor these motivated challengers.

Prediction markets still price Bass as the clear favorite overall, but the recent dip signals that bettors are increasingly pricing in uncertainty and Pratt's momentum. With early voting active and ballots due by June 2, the next few days will determine whether this becomes a straightforward reelection or a dramatic runoff battle.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 19:15

Mamdani Turns To DOGE-Style Playbook After Tax-The-Rich Plan Stalls

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has stolen the government-efficiency playbook from Elon Musk and President Trump's DOGE, repackaging it as the "Commission on Government Efficiency." This comes as the far-left mayor is grappling with a large budget deficit.

Democrats and their far-left, billionaire-funded NGOs and activist groups spent the first half of 2025 demonizing Trump's DOGE, which aimed to trim the bloated federal government.

Democrats: pic.twitter.com/qZnFjhWVEn

— Anthony Galli (@AnthonyGalli) May 28, 2026

"This morning we are introducing COGE — the Commission on Government Efficiency," the socialist mayor wrote on X on Thursday morning.

He continued, "This Commission will find ways for our city to work smarter, faster, and more effectively for working people. New Yorkers deserve a city government as careful with their money as they are."

This morning we are introducing COGE — the Commission on Government Efficiency.⁰⁰This Commission will find ways for our city to work smarter, faster, and more effectively for working people. ⁰⁰New Yorkers deserve a city government as careful with their money as they are.

— Mayor Zohran Kwame Mamdani (@NYCMayor) May 28, 2026

COGE will be led by former U.S. Ambassador to South Africa Patrick Gaspard, with Ann Cheng proposed as executive director. It plans to hold 10 public hearings across the metro area before presenting proposals to voters in November.

COGE comes as the mayor faces a large budget hole while pursuing a progressive agenda that includes free buses, free childcare, and affordable housing.

On Tuesday, he proposed a new housing plan that would pressure building owners, confiscate private property, and roll it into nonprofits. This, in itself, has sparked property-rights concerns. 

IT BEGINS…

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani unveils plan to "transfer ownership" from landlords to "the community" pic.twitter.com/uybGFPk5eD

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) May 26, 2026

X users respond to Mamdani's COGE: 

Good idea.

How much is the city currently spending on foreign citizens who are in the nation illegally, and their children?

Thanks,
Geiger Cap

— Geiger Capital (@Geiger_Capital) May 28, 2026

Great idea, let’s start with the unions and non-profits

— litquidity (@litcapital) May 28, 2026

Wait I thought Elon was evil because he tried to save everyone money and cut government inefficiency?

Or is that only when Elon does it?

— Yehuda Teitelbaum (@chalavyishmael) May 28, 2026

You’re spending over $1 billion in 2026 on services for illegal immigrants.

Please explain the efficiency in that.

— Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 (@Bubblebathgirl) May 28, 2026

Mamdani recently unveiled a $124.7 billion budget that includes $4 billion in state aid, while Albany approved a new pied-à-terre tax expected to raise $500 million for the city.

Related:

• Blue Cities Across The US Are Spiraling Into Financial Collapse

His move to 'eat the rich' by unleashing the tax cannon to fund left-wing experiments appears to have ended, for now.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 18:50

Anthropic Raises $65BN At $965 Billion Valuation, Surpassing OpenAI

Amid an unprecedented valuation battle between ChatGPT and Anthropic raging in the private markets ahead of their respective IPOs in a few months, Bloomberg reported that shortly after releasing its latest Claude Opus 4.8, Anthropic raised $65BN in a funding round that will nearly triple the start-up’s valuation and see it surpass arch-rival OpenAI as the most valuable AI lab.

The Claude chatbot maker was valued at $900bn, not including the new investment, as part of the fundraising led by Altimeter Capital, Dragoneer, Greenoaks and Sequoia Capital.

The round comes just three months after Anthropic raised $30bn in a deal valuing it at $350bn as the popularity of its tools for software developers and workplace customers has propelled extraordinary growth and given it an edge over OpenAI, which was most recently valued at $852bn.

“Claude’s latest advancements have driven large-scale adoption among the world’s most demanding organisations. This momentum positions Anthropic to lead the next phase of AI innovation,” said Brad Gerstner, founder and CEO of Altimeter Capital.

While Anthropic’s run-rate revenue, a metric prefered by start-ups which estimates annual revenues based on short-term performance, crossed $47bn this month, some have expressed skepticism that the number is legitimate, with many suggesting that double counting and even extapolating of outlier is the reason behind the surge.

If true (and things in the press should be taken with grains of salt), this one customer was reported as $6b of ARR for OAI/Anthropic ($500m*12) the month this happened.

For reference, that is larger than (checks notes) yup, Snowflake's run-rate revenue as of Q1.

😳 pic.twitter.com/Dj67m6rUmi

— Jared Sleeper (@JaredSleeper) May 28, 2026

The more than fivefold increase since the start of the year is unprecedented for a start-up its size. It's also most likely bogus, but that will be for the company's new public shareholders to figure out in a few months when the company goes public at an even more ludicrous valuation. 

According to the FT, backers are looking to build their stakes in Anthropic ahead of an initial public offering which could come as soon as this year, as OpenAI and SpaceX also race towards public listings. Together, the three companies are expected to have a valuation of ~$3 trillion and will drain an unprecedented amount of liquidity from the market, likely sparking the next market drawdown. 

The funding caps an extraordinary period for Anthropic, led by former ChatGPT employee Dario Amodei, when the announcement of its new AI tools has rattled whole sectors of the stock market from wealth managers to cyber security groups.

The power of its Mythos model, which it released to a limited group of trusted partners because of its advanced cyber security capabilities, has prompted concern from governments and financial regulators around the world. On Thursday, Anthropic said it was making progress towards a wider release of Mythos “in the coming weeks”. It also released the latest version of its Claude model, Opus 4.8, which the company said was more “honest” and “more likely to flag uncertainties about its work and less likely to make unsupported claims”.

The company is also embroiled in a legal fight with the Department of Defense over the military use of its technology, a battle that has scarcely dented Anthropic’s financial progress.

The new funding includes investments from the three leading makers of memory chips: Micron, Samsung and SK Hynix. Anthropic is an end customer for their hardware, which has increasingly been in short supply because of huge demand from AI data centres.

Their participation follows other circular agreements by both OpenAI and Anthropic with cloud providers and other chipmakers, such as Nvidia.

These circle-jerking arrangements between customers, suppliers and investors - reminiscent of the circular deals that burst the dot com bubble - in the AI industry have added to concerns about a bubble in the sector. Anthropic initially targeted a $30bn raise from financial institutions. The company exceeded that total in part thanks to the participation of infrastructure partners, the same infrastructure partners that will now see their money returned to them for compute purchases.

This added to $15bn in previously committed funding from Big Tech “hyperscalers”, including $5bn from Amazon, to fill out the $65bn raising.

The new capital will go towards Anthropic’s effort to procure enough computing power to meet rising demand for its tools. It has struggled with capacity issues in recent months.

It recently struck a multibillion-dollar deal with Elon Musk’s SpaceX to use one of its data centres, as well as long-term agreements with Google, Broadcom and Amazon potentially totalling hundreds of billions of dollars.

“This funding will help us serve the historic demand we are experiencing, stay at the research frontier, and bring Claude to more of the places where work happens,” said Krishna Rao, chief financial officer of Anthropic.

Other venture capital and fund managers who invested include Baillie Gifford, Blackstone and Brookfield and state-backed investors including Abu Dhabi’s MGX and Singapore’s Temasek. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 18:31

Tilman Fertitta Nears $5.7 Billion Caesars Takeover

Tilman Fertitta, the Texas billionaire behind Golden Nugget and Landry’s, is nearing a $5.7 billion takeover of Caesars Entertainment — a deal that would dramatically expand his footprint across casinos, hotels, and restaurants, according to Bloomberg.

The merger would unite Caesars’ gaming operations with Fertitta’s hospitality empire, which includes brands such as Mastro’s, Bubba Gump Shrimp, Rainforest Cafe, and several casino properties. Certain assets, including the Houston Rockets and some hotels, are expected to stay separate from the deal.

Bloomberg reports that Fertitta, 68, began working in his family’s seafood business in Galveston before building Landry’s into one of the country’s largest hospitality companies. After weathering the Texas oil crash in the 1980s, he grew through aggressive acquisitions and entered the casino industry with the purchase of Golden Nugget in 2005.

Recognized for his hands-on leadership and lavish business style, Fertitta became a national media figure through CNBC’s Billion Dollar Buyer and later served as U.S. ambassador to Italy and San Marino under President Donald Trump.

Caesars would give Fertitta a larger presence on the Las Vegas Strip, something he has sought for years. He first attempted to acquire the company in 2018. More recently, he became Wynn Resorts’ largest shareholder after publicly criticizing the company’s direction.

Despite owning major casino and online betting businesses, Caesars has faced slowing Las Vegas demand, softer regional results, and increasing pressure from betting competitors including FanDuel and DraftKings.

Fertitta’s broader portfolio also includes hotels, luxury car dealerships, and entertainment venues. His personal assets reportedly include a 384-foot yacht and a Gulfstream G700 jet. The Houston Rockets, which he bought in 2017 for $2.2 billion, are now estimated to be worth about $5.5 billion.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 18:00

Watch: Hollywood Actress Blows Whistle On Systemic Anti-White Discrimination In Casting

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Actress Samaire Armstrong, known for her role in the hit series The O.C., stepped forward with a raw account of Hollywood’s entrenched discrimination. For years, she stayed silent as casting directors repeatedly rejected her for one reason: her race. When she couldn’t hold back any longer she broke that silence, revealing how merit has been sacrificed on the altar of identity politics.

That was five years ago. In the intervening time, Hollywood has doubled and tripled down on this momentum.

Armstrong explained, “Over the last 6 years, I’ve heard nonstop, ‘They’re not looking for white.’ — ‘They liked you, but you’re white.’ And, you know, I kept that to myself in silence…the pendulum has swung so far, you know, like, ‘We’re gonna fit this transgender character in here now that we’re PC.’ Natural, organic stories stopped being told.”

“You gotta wonder, what’s the point of acting school and putting this time into developing the craft if that doesn’t matter anymore?” Armstrong urged.

Her testimony, shared in a PragerU interview and amplified across platforms, underscores a troubling reality: Hollywood isn’t just leaning into diversity — it’s enforcing exclusion.

This isn’t one isolated voice. Armstrong’s experience reflects a broader industry shift where skin color determines opportunity more than skill, training, or audience appeal. In a country still majority white, the creative heart of American entertainment has turned against its foundational talent pool.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences formalized this bias with its “Representation and Inclusion Standards” for Best Picture eligibility. Starting with the 96th Oscars in 2024, films must meet at least two of four detailed standards, backed by a confidential Academy Inclusion Standards form (RAISE).

These rules prioritize “underrepresented” groups — defined to include women, racial or ethnic minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, and the disabled or deaf — across every level of production.

Standard A: On-Screen Representation, Themes and Narratives
To qualify, a film needs at least one of these:

• A lead or significant supporting actor from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
• At least 30% of actors in minor and supporting roles from at least two underrepresented groups.
• A main storyline or theme centered on an underrepresented group.

Standard B: Creative Leadership and Project Team

• At least two creative leadership or department head positions filled by underrepresented groups (with at least one from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group).
• At least six other key crew or technical positions from underrepresented groups.
• At least 30% of the overall crew from at least two underrepresented groups.

Standard C: Industry Access and Opportunities focuses on paid apprenticeships, internships, and training programs targeted at preferred demographics. Standard D: Audience Development requires multiple senior executives or consultants from underrepresented groups in marketing, publicity, and distribution.

These mandates didn’t emerge in a vacuum. They accelerated after 2020 amid corporate panic over social justice pressures. The Academy framed them as promoting “equitable representation” to reflect a “diverse global population.” In practice, they function as barriers against projects centered on white characters or led by white creatives in a nation where whites remain the demographic majority.

Iconic films from Hollywood’s golden eras would fail these tests. Casablanca, The Godfather, Saving Private Ryan, No Country for Old Men, or even Titanic in its original form wouldn’t check enough boxes. The rules don’t just encourage diversity — they penalize storytelling rooted in European-American cultural traditions or historical accuracy.

Armstrong didn’t arrive at her critique lightly. In her PragerU “Stories of Us” segment, she detailed the gradual erosion she witnessed. She acknowledged past imbalances — “Oscars were so white for decades” — but argued the correction overshot into absurdity. Natural character development and subtle narratives gave way to forced inserts and demographic engineering.

Organic tales of human struggle, ambition, love, and loss vanished under layers of ideological checklists.

This hits aspiring actors hard. Acting demands years of classes, auditions, rejections, and honing emotional range. When race becomes the deciding factor, that investment must feel pointless.

Reports from others in the industry echo her account. White actresses and actors describe similar experiences — agencies steering clients away from certain roles or auditions explicitly noting preferences for non-white performers. One parent recounted her son’s early acting opportunities drying up once “no whites” language appeared in casting calls. Families of talented young performers now face tough choices: pivot careers or accept systemic disadvantage.

Hollywood’s defense often falls back on “underrepresentation” statistics. Yet these ignore viewer preferences and box office realities. Audiences don’t reject diversity when it feels authentic; they reject pandering that prioritizes messaging over entertainment.

'This might actually be a good thing - but if you’re doing it to be tokenistic, it’s completely pointless!'

The Free Speech Nation panel discuss the Oscars’ new diversity and inclusivity rules.

🖥 GB News on YouTube https://t.co/Wa58gYGZwF pic.twitter.com/MLk5tcPb0c

— GB News (@GBNEWS) May 14, 2023

When every ensemble requires a precise racial mix, every leadership team checks ethnicity boxes, storytelling suffers. Characters become mouthpieces. Plots twist to accommodate themes rather than emerging from genuine conflict.

The decline isn’t imaginary. Recent years delivered a string of high-budget disappointments: franchise entries laden with awkward diversity lectures, remakes that rewrite history for contemporary politics, and originals that feel like committee products rather than visionary works.

Studios chase Oscar validation and corporate ESG scores. Meeting Academy standards boosts awards chances and shields against activist boycotts. But it alienates core domestic audiences who simply want compelling stories. International markets sometimes reward spectacle over messaging, yet even there, fatigue sets in when quality plummets.

Compare this to earlier eras. Classic Hollywood produced universal stories — tales of redemption, heroism, romance, and tragedy — that transcended demographics. Directors cast the best actors for roles, not the best demographic fit. Writers explored human nature without mandatory identity arcs. The result was timeless cinema that still draws viewers decades later.

Today’s approach inverts that. “Natural, organic stories stopped being told,” as Armstrong noted. Scripts now insert transgender subplots or racial redemption arcs mechanically. Casting directors scan headshots for skin tone checkboxes first. This creates a chilling effect: white performers self-censor or exit, while others game the system.

The financial toll shows. Major releases flop despite massive marketing. Streaming catalogs fill with forgettable content. Independent and international films — less beholden to U.S. Academy rules — often outperform in authenticity and engagement. Asian cinema, in particular, thrives on merit-based casting and culturally grounded narratives without Western-style guilt.

This discrimination fits a larger pattern of institutional hostility toward majority populations in Western nations. Policies that punish success and reward grievance thrive in elite circles detached from everyday consequences. Hollywood, overwhelmingly coastal and progressive, embraced these ideas enthusiastically after 2016 and 2020.

Armstrong’s conservative leanings — including past support for Trump and criticism of certain activist movements — make her voice especially threatening to the establishment. Speaking out risks career suicide in an industry known for enforcing ideological conformity. Her decision to go public anyway highlights growing cracks in the silence.

Critics of the standards face accusations of racism for pointing out anti-white bias. Yet the rules themselves codify racial preference. In a just system, opportunity flows from talent, work ethic, and market demand. Forcing outcomes by skin color inverts justice — it becomes discrimination with extra steps.

Entertainment should unite through shared humanity, not fragment by mandated identity tallies. When government-adjacent entities like the Academy dictate creative output, art dies. Viewers sense the fraud and tune out.

Broader society feels the ripple effects. Young white talent redirects energy elsewhere — tech, trades, entrepreneurship — where merit still rules. Cultural confidence erodes when a nation’s primary storytelling medium treats its founding stock as obstacles. Families notice the pattern in commercials, shows, and films: white characters often portrayed as clueless, evil, or sidelined.

Change won’t come from within Hollywood’s echo chamber. It requires audience rebellion — supporting projects that prioritize story over quotas. Independent creators, YouTube filmmakers, and platforms free from legacy gatekeepers already fill voids. Success stories like certain unapologetic comedies or action films prove audiences crave competence and fun.

Some performers and executives quietly admit the problems. Box office data reinforces the point: preachy content underperforms. Global competition from industries unburdened by these rules grows fiercer.

Armstrong’s stand adds to a chorus demanding restoration of merit. Her call to “break the silence before it’s too late” urges others in the industry to prioritize truth over career preservation. If enough voices join, pressure could build against the Academy’s rules and studio practices.

Ultimately, Hollywood’s anti-white tilt reveals deeper contempt for its audience and heritage. By sidelining skilled performers, the industry doesn’t just harm individuals — it degrades the art form itself. Viewers deserve better than propaganda disguised as entertainment.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 17:40

Treasury Appointees Push To Put Trump's Face On A Brand-New $250 Bill

Two political appointees at the Treasury Department spent months pressing Bureau of Engraving and Printing staff to develop prototypes for a $250 bill bearing Donald Trump's portrait, even as bureau officials repeatedly warned them the project had no legal foundation and could take nearly a decade to execute properly, the Washington Post reports.

U.S. Treasurer Brandon Beach and senior adviser Mike Brown, both political appointees, began pushing bureau staff last year to prepare designs for the note. Beach handed over mock-up materials in August and September, including a design placing Trump's face at the center of the bill, flanked by Trump's and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's signatures. The effort would mark the first time a living person appeared on U.S. currency since 1866, and current employees, speaking anonymously out of fear of retaliation, claim the internal pressure was real.

The artist behind the designs, British painter Iain Alexander, said he discussed the project directly with Trump and received feedback on specifics. "He likes to call me his favorite British artist," Alexander said.

Trump reportedly pushed for American flag colors and a "250" logo tied to the nation's semiquincentennial, and Alexander said Trump "absolutely loved" the proposed reverse side of the note, which would feature a women's liberation theme with Betsy Ross.

Bureau director Patricia "Patty" Solimene, a 24-year Army veteran and the first woman to lead the bureau, told Beach and Brown plainly that the project was unauthorized. One employee described her position this way: "She had told them we're not authorized to do this. We can't progress any further, and all the stakeholders have not even met to discuss the next steps." The same employee noted that "currency often takes six to eight years to produce a new bill, particularly one of such high value."

Solimene was reassigned from her position on April 27. The following day, she sent a farewell email to staff that read, in part, "The buck stopped here," and acknowledged the move was "not my choice." Brown subsequently became the bureau's acting director. Treasury declined to comment on the circumstances of Solimene's reassignment, and the White House did not respond to requests for comment.

Legally, the proposed bill faces several obstacles. Federal law restricts living individuals from appearing on U.S. currency, a rule that has been on the books for over 150 years. Beyond the portrait question, the bureau is authorized to produce only specific denominations, and $250 is not among them. Former bureau director Larry R. Felix explained that "a $250 note is not statutorily authorized" without congressional action, adding, "The secretary has to be given authority to do that." Alexander said he, too, had been told legislation was necessary.

And it is unlikely that Congress would approve it. Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) previously introduced a bill in February 2025 directing the Treasury to issue $250 Federal Reserve notes featuring Trump's image, tied to the 250th anniversary celebrations beginning in July. The bill stalled in the House Financial Services Committee and did not receive a hearing.

A department spokesperson said the bureau is "conducting appropriate planning and due diligence" and would proceed with a commemorative $250 note only if Congress passes the required legislation. Treasury also said Beach has "never asked staff to print the bill before congressional passage." At the same time, the department confirmed Bessent would recognize Trump's "historic achievements" by adding his signature to existing currency, noting no law prohibits a sitting president's signature on bills. Solimene and her staff had separately agreed to print $100 bills featuring Trump's signature, which employees said were already in production at the bureau's Washington facility.

What's next?

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 17:20

DOJ Launches Criminal Probe Into E. Jean Carroll Over Alleged Perjury In Trump Lawsuits

The Department of Justice has opened a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, the veteran advice columnist and author who won two major civil lawsuits against President Donald Trump, CBS News reports. Carroll accused Trump of sexually abusing her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the mid-1990s and then defaming her when he denied the encounter ever happened.

The probe focuses on Carroll's 2022 deposition. She stated under oath that no outside parties were helping fund her cases. Later it came out that a nonprofit backed by billionaire Reid Hoffman – a sharp Trump critic and major Democratic donor – had covered some of her costs.

The investigation is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Northern District of Illinois, led by Trump-appointed Andrew Boutros. No charges have been brought yet, and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has stepped aside from the matter.

The Core Allegation: A Deposition Discrepancy

During her October 2022 deposition, when asked directly if anyone else was paying her legal fees, Carroll said she was on a contingency arrangement with her lawyers and denied any outside funding. But in April 2023, her team disclosed that money had come from American Future Republic, a nonprofit largely funded by LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman.

Her lawyers called it an honest oversight – she simply forgot about the arrangement at the time. Trump’s side, however, called it suspicious and potentially damaging to her credibility.

The Carroll-Trump Verdicts

The lawsuits ended with big wins for Carroll:

• In 2023, a jury held Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation, awarding Carroll about $5 million.
• In 2024, a second jury slapped him with an $83.3 million defamation verdict.

Trump has vigorously appealed both outcomes, describing the entire process as a politically driven effort against him.

The Reid Hoffman Connection

Reid Hoffman has never hidden his dislike for Trump, and he’s poured tens of millions into Democratic causes over the years. He defended funding Carroll’s case as a way to make sure an ordinary person could afford to take on someone as powerful as a former president.

As the NLPC noted in March of 2025: 

Through yet another nonprofit (or possibly the same one), Hoffman also paid the legal bills for Trump accuser E. Jean Carroll, who sued him for defamation over her allegations of rape against him going back to the 1990s. To set the stage for the lawsuit to be able to move forward – through yet another secretive nonprofit group backed by Hoffman – Carroll told CNN that she helped New York Democrats to pass a new law in 2022 to extend the statute of limitations for sexual assault civil lawsuits beyond 20 years, which enabled her to sue President Trump during a one-year window. And Hoffman also said last year, just days before the assassination attempt in Butler, Pa., that he wished he could have made Trump a real “martyr.”

The investigation is still in its early days. Prosecutors will be digging through transcripts, financial records, emails, and anything else that might show whether Carroll intentionally misled the court.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 17:00

Next Drone War: Hidden Shipping Containers Launching Kamikaze Swarms

Continuing our theme that the endgame in drone warfare is nowhere near complete, and in many ways is only just beginning, a U.S. company called DZYNE Technologies has developed a containerized mass-launch system for kamikaze drones.

Under the guise of a regular shipping container, DZYNE's BlitzBox signals the next phase of drone wars: not just cheaper drones, but the ability to launch them at scale from concealed, mobile, and rapidly deployable platforms. 

The American company Dzyne has introduced the BlitzBox system, a container for covertly launching a swarm of attack drones. On the outside, it looks like an ordinary cargo box, but inside, it can hold up to 100 Blitz drones, ready to launch in minutes.#DroneWars #UAS #UAV pic.twitter.com/w9aRaZYrCZ

— Drone Wars (@Drone_Wars_) May 27, 2026

The battlefield is shifting from individual launches to containerized swarm warfare, where dozens or even hundreds of low-cost suicide drones can be launched in waves to overwhelm some of the most advanced air defense systems, strike high-value assets, or generate mass effects at relatively low cost.

DZYNE's Connor Toler told defense tech outlet TWZ that BlitzBox can be operated with as much human control or automated functionality as the mission requires.

Toler noted that DZYNE is working on a 40-foot shipping container capable of launching upwards of 100 one-way attack drones.

He added that DZYNE has already "worked with several customers across the DOW [Department of War]" regarding the BlitzBox.

The drone playbook with BlitzBox appears similar to Ukraine's move about a year ago, where a box truck full of attack drones was deployed deep within Russia to strike several long-range bombers on the tarmac of a military base.

Asymmetric and irregular warfare is shifting into hyperdrive. As we've noted, Ukraine has become the world's AI weapons laboratory, and the drone wars are still only in their opening chapters. 

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 16:40

Texas Authorities Arrest 6 Chinese "Special Interest Aliens" In Camouflage

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Texas authorities arrested six Chinese nationals dressed in camouflage who were allegedly attempting to evade capture after crossing the border illegally into the United States, officials said, describing them as "special interest aliens."

U.S. Border Patrol agents monitor the Southern border outside of San Diego, on May 27, 2026. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Lt. Chris Olivarez, a spokesperson for the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS), said on May 27 that the Chinese nationals were apprehended by U.S. Border Patrol agents on a private ranch in Maverick County near the Texas-Mexico border.

The six Chinese nationals were among a group of 12 illegal immigrants apprehended during the late-night operation, Olivarez said in a post on X. All six were dressed in camouflage clothing.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defines a special interest alien as someone "who, based on an analysis of travel patterns, potentially poses a national security risk to the United States or its interests."

The apprehension was the second operation carried out in Maverick County on the night of May 26 involving illegal immigrants allegedly attempting to avoid detection.

Olivarez said that tracking K-9 Bona and her handler assisted Border Patrol agents in tracking and apprehending seven illegal immigrants on another private ranch in the county. The group included nationals from Mexico, Guatemala, India, Ecuador, and Cuba.

"These apprehensions highlight the ongoing efforts in deterring criminal activity along the southern border and the critical partnership between Texas DPS and our federal partners under Operation Lone Star," Olivarez said in a statement. "Border security is national security."

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said in a post on X that "Operation Lone Star continues nonstop to arrest illegal immigrants along our border."

Operation Lone Star, launched in 2021, is a Texas-led border security initiative involving multiple law enforcement agencies aimed at curbing illegal immigration, drug trafficking, and other cross-border criminal activity.

Similar Cases Reported In South Texas

Texas authorities have reported several similar incidents in recent months involving Chinese nationals apprehended after illegally crossing the southern border, with some also allegedly wearing camouflage clothing.

In February, Texas DPS said troopers stopped a vehicle in Maverick County and discovered four people smuggled inside, all dressed in camouflage. One of the passengers was identified as Beibei Liu, 34, a Chinese national classified as a special interest alien.

In another case earlier this month, a DPS Brush Team working alongside U.S. Border Patrol agents apprehended six people during multiple encounters near Roma in Starr County. Olivarez later said one of the individuals was a Chinese national designated as a special interest alien.

Authorities said all six individuals arrested in the Starr County operation were wearing colored wristbands commonly used by transnational criminal organizations to indicate payment status and coordinate movement along cartel-controlled smuggling routes.

Expanded Immigration Enforcement Push

The latest arrests come amid a broader push by the Trump administration to intensify immigration enforcement and increase deportations.

White House border czar Tom Homan said in an interview published on May 20 that the administration was seeking to raise deportation numbers further, despite what he described as a temporary slowdown earlier this year tied to operational and funding disruptions.

"We are after everyone, but again, you've got to prioritize those who are the biggest threats to our national security, public safety," Homan told the Washington Examiner.

Homan said roughly 800,000 illegal immigrants had been removed from the country since President Donald Trump returned to office, adding that "hundreds of thousands" of those removed were criminals or public safety threats.

Meanwhile, DHS announced on May 26 a new directive aimed at combating fraud in the U.S. asylum system.

Under the policy, Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorneys will receive expanded authority to pursue enforcement actions against immigration lawyers accused of filing fraudulent asylum claims or coaching clients to conceal information from authorities.

DHS General Counsel James Percival said the administration was moving to address what he described as widespread abuse of asylum protections.

"Protection claims like asylum are intended to cover unique and narrow circumstances, but it is standard practice for immigration attorneys representing illegal aliens to assert that virtually every illegal alien is going to be persecuted or tortured in his or her home country," Percival said in a statement.

The American Immigration Lawyers Association criticized the directive, calling it a "chilling directive" targeting immigration attorneys and rejecting allegations of systemic fraud within the asylum system.

Jack Phillips and Naveen Athrapully contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/28/2026 - 16:20