As we've reported, the recently released Epstein Files have shone an unflattering light on many powerful people. President Donald Trump is among those exposed, which is why it was unsurprising to see so many unnecessary (and illegal) redactions in the released documents.
Providing some additional transparency, members of congress have been given permission to view un-redacted files at a Department of Justice (DoJ) facility. Alarmingly, however, we've now discovered the following:
'Burn book'It is totally inappropriate and against the separations of powers for the DOJ to surveil us as we search the Epstein files. Bondi showed up today with a burn book that held a printed search history of exactly what emails I searched. That is outrageous and I intend to pursue this… https://t.co/nyZjmHoGUq
— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) February 11, 2026
As we reported, the Epstein Files Transparency Act put it into law that the DoJ must publish all the documents related to the dead paedophile. The law allows for redactions to protect victims, but no one else. Despite this, the DoJ redacted the names of Epstein's associates and potential co-conspirators.
As a result of members of congress having access to the un-redacted Epstein Files, we've learned information such as the following:
BREAKING: Congressman Jamie Raskin says Trump's name shows up in the unredacted Epstein files 1 MILLION TIMES (it was 38,000 in the redacted files) - Axios
— Secular Talk (KyleKulinskiShow@bsky.social) (@KyleKulinski) February 10, 2026
The above would mean we only have access to 3.8% of the times that the files mention Donald Trump. Trump was not a victim of Epstein, and so his name should not have been redacted.
More has come out too, including the names of "powerful men" linked to Epstein:
BREAKING: RO KHANNA JUST UNVEILED THE NAMES OF 6 POWERFUL MEN WHO WERE REDACTED IN THE EPSTEIN FILES
Here they are:
• Salvatore Nuara
• Zurab Mikeladze
• Leonic Leonov
• Nicola Caputo
• Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem
• Leslie WexnerWhy did the Trump DOJ cover for them? pic.twitter.com/qIh6Xtn0dC
— Sulaiman Ahmed (@ShaykhSulaiman) February 10, 2026
Others highlighted the improper redactions:
Hey @DAGToddBlanche, I saw the unredacted version of this email, and there is no reason it should be redacted from the public.
Unless, of course, you are trying to protect your master @realdonaldtrump. pic.twitter.com/unEuN0GGRj
— Daniel Goldman (@danielsgoldman) February 11, 2026
Yesterday @RepRoKhanna and I found a list of names and photos in the Epstein files that DOJ had improperly redacted.
DOJ promptly unredacted the men's names as well as several women in the list that we didn't flag. The two redacted names are victims. https://t.co/fLLzGW9rR7 pic.twitter.com/DTfK30Kppk
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) February 10, 2026
We also learned the identity of a the man who sent an email referencing a "torture video":
Elon Musk has framed the recent exodus of talent from his artificial intelligence startup, xAI, as a necessary growing pain, saying the company's evolution "required parting ways with some people."…
More than 2000 Brits served in Israel's genocide in Gaza, new figures have shown. Declassified UK obtained the troubling information through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. The number is vastly greater than previously reported figures.
The investigative outlet reported that:
The data outlines the number of people with dual and multiple nationalities who were IDF service members as of March 2025.
It shows how 1,686 British-Israelis and a further 383 people with British, Israeli, and another nationality served in the IDF amid the annihilation of Gaza.
Reporting by Declassified UK suggested this was also a global issue, with recruits from across the world joining the ranks of the IDF.
They were among over 50,000 IDF soldiers with Israeli and at least one other nationality.
The largest cohorts come from the US, Russia, Ukraine, France, and Germany.
The figure previously known was just 54.
Prosecutions must followPaul Heron, a lawyer with the Public Interest Law Centre (PILC), said prosecutions should be pursued wherever possible:
There must be no impunity where credible evidence links British nationals to grave breaches of international law.
The UK has clear duties to prevent genocide and avoid assisting unlawful military action.
He added that investigations into events in Gaza are essential for justice.
Where dual nationals have served in units implicated in atrocities, the authorities must investigate promptly and, where the evidence meets the threshold, pursue arrest and prosecution like any other serious crime.
The figures seen by Declassified UK line up with claims by one IDF soldier that thousands of Brits had served in the Israeli military:
Londoner Sam Sank fought in Gaza between December 2023 and January 2024 and later told the Times:
based on the number of his friends in the IDF, which includes a Scot in his own small unit, [he] believes there are hundreds, if not thousands, more Britons fighting in Israel."
Public Interest Law Centre (PILC) and the Gaza-based Palestinian Centre for Human Rights submitted a war crimes dossier to the Foreign Office in 2025. The document detailed British citizens alleged involvement in alleged war crimes.
Heron said "No one is above the law":
War crimes unitIn our report to the Metropolitan Police, we set out credible evidence that 10 British nationals served in the Israeli Defence Forces and were involved in war crimes and acts giving rise to genocide.
The British police have a war crimes investigation unit. When asked by Declassified in 2025 if they would be referring Gaza allegations for prosecutions they did not respond.
International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) told Declassified:
No one in the UK wants to live next door to a potential war criminal.
And yet, British people who fought in the IDF are allowed to return to this country and live freely amongst us, despite fighting for an army that is committing genocide.
UCJP said inaction was "inexcusable":
It is utterly inexcusable that the UK government is failing to take action to hold citizens accountable for potential violations of international and domestic law.
The British government and judiciary need to move on IDF war crimes allegations—and move fast. British citizens taking part in Israel war crimes should be investigated and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Both as a matter of principle and as a matter of pubic safety.
You can read the full Declassified UK report here.
Featured image via the Canary
By Joe Glenton
In recent days, Israeli media outlets revealed plans by prison authorities to inaugurate an execution facility—nicknamed the "Israeli Green Mile." These facilities will resemble death chambers, reserved for Palestinians accused of terrorism.
Their death sentences will reportedly be carried out within 90 days of the final judicial decision.
This step represents a new escalation of violence against Palestinian detainees. Israeli outlets are concerned—as they say—with the psychological burden on executioners, with no regard for the innocence of those wrongfully detained. Israeli agents of death, who participation will reportedly be 'voluntary,' will reportedly undergo psychological and operational training—murder dressed up as due process.
Legalised killing groundsThe Palestinian Prisoners' Club has warned of the danger of transforming prisons into "legalised killing grounds". They contend that Israeli prisons are no longer detention sites, but have been transformed into spaces for torture, starvation and slow execution, as part of a retaliatory policy that legalises murder.
Prisons as tools for systematic killing
Since October 7, 2023, Palestinian detainees have endured horrific abuse at the hands of Israeli guards. Their treatment has reached new depths of depravity. Detainees are routinely denied medical care, deprived of sleep, shackled by their limbs, and subjected to sexual violence and a litany of sadistic torture methods. Collective humiliation is also part of the Israeli play book — forcing Palestinians to chant Zionist slogans, or kiss the Israeli flag.
Israeli Channel 13 quoted Israeli sources saying that the law will initially be applied to prisoners from elite battalions of the Islamic Resistance Movement—Hamas in other words—accused by Israel of carrying out the 7 October attack. It will later be rolled out in the occupied West Bank.
Execution without due processThis escalation is based on a bill submitted by the Jewish Power party, led by the fascist national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. They proposed amending Article 301(a) of the Israeli Penal Code to allow the death penalty to be imposed on anyone accused of killing an Israeli for 'hostile or nationalistic' motives. This will be without the possibility of pardon.
The bill also grants military courts in the West Bank the authority to issue death sentences without unanimity and oversight.
Following the bill's approval in its first reading, Ben-Gvir said that:
the only sentence awaiting those who kill Israelis is execution.
His remarks lay bare the retributive nature of the bill.
International warnings and Israeli disregardUN experts are calling on Israel to withdraw the bill, stressing that the application of the death penalty in the occupied territories violates international humanitarian law and that the Israeli military legal system lacks legitimacy under the rules of occupation.
However, the right-wing Israeli government continues to push the bill as part of a broader package led by Ben-Gvir. Under the false banner of 'strict deterrence' they intend on reinforcing policies of repression and collective punishment.
Pundits also view the bill and state-backed push for execution wards as a response to Israel's failure to achieve its military objectives in Gaza. As a direct consequence, Israel is desperately appealing to, and appeasing, the extreme right in Israel. Where will they draw the line?
Featured image via the Canary
By Alaa Shamali
Microsoft has abruptly announced the deprecation of Polyglot Notebooks with less than two months' notice, throwing the future of the .NET Interactive project into doubt.…
Apple patched a zero-day vulnerability affecting every iOS version since 1.0, used in what the company calls an "extremely sophisticated attack" against targeted individuals.…
Exploding memory prices are pushing corporate buyers to fast-track PC purchases before costs climb further.…
NASA has ended most science operations on its Swift observatory to keep the spacecraft in orbit a little longer.…
If you're old enough, you'll remember the British press constantly moaned about the 'nanny state' in the New Labour years. This is the term for when the government interferes in people's every day business to an unhealthy degree. And as we've seen this week, Nigel Farage is going to be the nanny state personified if he becomes PM.
First he was going after work-from-home; now he wants to tell you what you can and can't call oat milk:
When I first made this TikTok video in 2024 you all laughed at me.
Well, today the Supreme Court has ruled that 'oat milk' can no longer be called milk.
You're not laughing now are you! pic.twitter.com/WFQaEgNulO
— Nigel Farage MP (@Nigel_Farage) February 11, 2026
How about minding your business, feller?
We are laughing now, to be fairFarage is referring to the Supreme Court ruling which decided you can't call oat milk 'milk' anymore. We have two thoughts on this:
- We're really spending time and money on this?
- We'll continue to call it oat milk out of habit, but we don't care either way - we have more important things to worry about.
In the video above, Farage says:
So I'm in a smart hotel in London; I've got a cup, I want some milk. Let's have a look. We've got semi-skimmed, I don't like that. Oat milk? What on Earth's that when it's at home. Almond milk. All I want's proper bloody milk, not left-wing options - proper milk. What's wrong with me asking for that?
You are an old man in a public breakfast room shouting at the coffee table; this isn't normal.
We're going to print this in big, bold letters so that it gets through:
IF THE THOUGHT OF OAT MILK UPSETS YOU, YOU ARE TOO EASILY UPSET.
This is absolute snowflake behaviour.
And going further, there is nothing 'left-wing' about oat milk. Almond milk did not feature in the Communist Manifesto. Organised labour have never gone on strike to secure the right to coconut milk. Cashew milk is not a key tenet of Xi Jinping Thought.
Farage is doing two things here:
- Thinking that anything which wasn't common in his childhood is wrong by default because his brain is decaying.
- Thinking that anything he doesn't personally enjoy is 'left wing' because he's right wing.
As we mentioned, Mr Nanny is also telling people where they can and can't work. HG reported for the Canary:
Nigel Farage is going after work-from-home, in a hypocritical attempt to make it look like he's ever worked a day in his life.
Of course, Nigey isn't telling us that he previously employed his wife to work from home.
To make matters more infuriating, Reform UK also happens to employ people who work from home.
These people are going to be all up in your business while telling you to mind yours.
This your guy?As is obvious from Farage's tweet, he's spent the past two years stewing on this. Do we really want this petty, small-minded dweeb in charge of the country?
Because let's be real - at this point, he's gonna want revenge for a lot more than just his opinions about milk.
Featured image via Trademark Room
By Willem Moore
Opposition parties and housing activists have denounced a new housing bill passed in the Dáil. People Before Profit (PBP) TD Paul Murphy described it as a "landlord's charter written by a landlord's government".
On the face of it, the housing bill seems to introduce a series of useful new protections for tenants. These include:
- No-fault evictions only allowed in very limited circumstances—for landlords with four tenancies or fewer who face certain forms of hardship such as financial difficulties or separation from a partner.
- A new minimum tenancy of six years that operates on a rolling basis.
- The whole of Ireland is treated as a Rent Pressure Zone (RPZ). This means that rents on tenants in-situ can only be raised by a maximum of 2% each year.
However, the right of landlords to raise rents for new tenancies or every six years is likely to still mean tenants pay extortionate sums, the key existing problem of the Irish housing crisis.
Housing rights groups hammer new billThis was the thrust of Murphy's stance when he said:
This is a bill for rip-off rents. That's the purpose of it. It's not an accidental outcome of it, that's the purpose. The government strategy explicitly is to get rents to rise higher in order to attract more investment.
The government is indeed clear about this, with the minister for housing, local government and heritage James Browne saying:
I want to grow the supply of rental homes available - attract more landlords and retain existing landlords in the market. Providing the policy conditions for a sustained increase in supply is essential because it will help ease price pressures across the rental market, and will widen the pool of available rental properties, thereby facilitating greater choice for individuals and families.
So rather than proper public investment in housing, the government continues to trust in the private sector to solve a problem it has thus far totally failed at.
Tenants union CATU emphasised this, with organiser Helen Moynihan saying:
We have a really precarious housing setup that already overly relies on the private market, and now we're looking at legislation that will make that even more precarious. So we're especially concerned about the fact that landlords can raise [rent] to market [rate].
It's just it's really important not to get confused about this word supply. Houses that are not affordable for ordinary everyday workers do not increase supply. And this is the increase of the kind of properties we're going to see. They're not affordable for us. They're not supply for your everyday worker.
Housing charity Threshold pointed out how those moving home will be unfairly penalised:
Rushed through — 'a truly appalling way to make legislation'Threshold is concerned that the option for landlords to set market rents between tenancies may result in an unintended consequence whereby renters, particularly those who need to move home, end up paying high rents within three to four years and see their overall rental security undermined.
We are not aware of any modelling done to determine the impact this change could have on market rent levels. The recent Threshold and Housing Rights NI all-island survey of renters shows that approximately 25% of renters in the Republic of Ireland left their last rental tenancy voluntarily. Market trends already show tenants who move home pay higher rents, this will only be exacerbated by the proposed legislation.
Protesters rallied outside the Dáil as the housing bill was 'debated', though in reality only:
…nine of 69 amendments that had been put forward by opposition parties were discussed.
The government accepted none of these, and Sinn Féin housing spokesperson Eoin Ó Broin described the ramming through of the bill as a:
…truly appalling way to make legislation.
Party leader Mary Lou McDonald raised the spectre of Irish people once again fleeing abroad as so many previous generations have, saying:
Seven thousand Irish medical professionals were registered to work in Australia last year. If your bill goes through, we will lose many many more. Because the rent hikes will be off the charts.
Predictably, landlords were unhappy at even the limited concessions being made to tenants. The Irish Property Owners Association (IPOA) said:
At the Irish Property Owners Association, we're concerned that, as it stands, the Bill could unintentionally push more private landlords out of the market and reduce rental supply even further.
They continued:
Tenants need security and certainty, and that matters. But landlords also need clarity, fair treatment and confidence that they can manage or sell their properties when circumstances change. If too many landlords feel boxed in, the reality is they may sell up - leaving fewer homes, less choice and more pressure on renters.
In other words, won't someone think of the poor landlords, the people who typically own multiple properties? They may have a point, though—if landlords get fed up, supply may indeed evaporate. That's not an argument for giving in to their demands. It's a reason to scrap a system that treats housing as a commodity, and relies heavily on the whims of those looking to turn a profit from something that should be a basic human right.
Featured image via Unsplash/the Canary
In war, death is usually a number. Not every casualty in Gaza has been identified however. The graves of women, children, and men lay empty and the burning question is not how they died but where they are? Where are their remains?
A documentary by Al Jazeera Arabic — The Rest of the Story — names the phenomenon 'evaporation.' They document 2,842 cases of Palestinians who have disappeared since October 2023. The victims have received no burials. With no bodies found, there have been no funerals either. Members of the Gaza Civil Defence who feature in the documentary underline Israel's use of lethal thermal and thermo-pressurised munitions. This is used to account for the missing.
Counting the missing in GazaAccording to Mahmoud Basal, spokesperson for the Gaza Civil Defence, these latest figures are the result of intricate fieldwork.
Recovery specialists have been matching the number of people inside the building that were targeted with the number of bodies recovered.
For example, when a family reports that five people were in the house, but only three bodies are found after extensive searches, the remaining two cases are recorded as missing persons.
Thermobaric weaponsMilitary experts have highlighted differences between thermo-pressurised weapons from conventional explosives. They reportedly scatter a cloud of fuel that ignites. This creates a fireball and a powerful shock wave within enclosed spaces. The result is multiplying the effects of heat, suffocation, and detonation compounded into a single moment.
It also refers to the use of explosive materials containing a mixture of TNT and aluminium powder, which raises the temperature of the explosion to very high levels within seconds. According to health officials in Gaza, featured in the documentary, exposure to extreme heat and pressure can lead to rapid tissue decomposition. This happens especially in enclosed spaces, where the effect of the heat wave is magnified.
Munitions galoreThe report named specific types of bombs, including MK-84, BLU-109 and GBU-39, noting their technical characteristics. This applies both in terms of their ability to penetrate buildings before detonation and to generate intense internal shockwaves. It also reported finding metal remnants at some sites attributed to these munitions.
Legal experts who spoke to Al Jazeera Arabic condemned the use of weapons that do not distinguish between combatants and civilians. This, if proven, would constitute grave violations of international humanitarian law.
The issue of the responsibility of arms-exporting countries was also raised, given the continued flow of ammunition during the war. This comes in parallel with provisional measures issued by the International Court of Justice. It opens up the issue of accountability beyond the battlefield.
The search continuesBut behind the numbers, the story is one of despair and indignity, as families continue to search for their loves ones — or least what remains of them.
A mother waiting for her son's body to bury him. A father carrying a small bag of remains said to belong to his children. And hundreds of homes that have found nothing to say goodbye to.
In Gaza, loss is no longer a scene of mourning. Sometimes loss is a complete void, a heavy silence, a question hanging in the air — how can a person disappear without a trace?
Featured image via the Canary
By Alaa Shamali
Cybercriminals are turning supply chain attacks into an industrial-scale operation, linking breaches, credential theft, and ransomware into a "self-reinforcing" ecosystem, researchers say.…
Have you ever asked Alexa to remind you to send a WhatsApp message at a determined hour? And then you just wonder, 'Why can't Alexa just send the message herself? Or the incredible frustration when you use an app to plan a trip, only to have to jump to your calendar/booking website/tour/bank account instead of your AI assistant doing it all? Well, exactly this gap between AI automation and human action is what the agent-to-agent (A2A) protocol aims to address. With the introduction of AI Agents, the next step of evolution seemed to be communication. But when communication between machines…
This story continues at The Next Web
Open Source Policy Summit 2026 SUSE recommends that companies should run on FOSS - but an accidental revelation from a company exec, live on stage, reveals it doesn't practice what it preaches. It's not alone.…
After warnings from lawmakers last year, WhatsApp has been blocked in Russia for as many as 100 million users, the Financial Times reported. Russian authorities removed the app from an online directory, effectively wiping it from Russia's internet. The government has previously said that it wants users to switch to an app called Max, an unencrypted WeChat clone.
"Today the Russian government has attempted to fully block WhatsApp in an effort to drive users to a state-owned surveillance app," Meta told the FT in a statement. "Trying to isolate over 100 million people from private and secure communication is a backwards step and can only lead to less safety for people in Russia."
The Russian government deleted WhatsApp rival Telegram yesterday, while also erasing Meta apps Facebook and Instagram. YouTube access was also reportedly degraded, though it's not clear if the app has been completely removed.
In July 2025, a Russian lawmaker who regulates the IT industry said it's very likely that WhatsApp would be placed on a list of restricted software. Parent Meta has been designated as an extremist organization in Russia, and last year Vladimir Putin issued a directive for the nation to further restrict communication apps originating from "unfriendly countries" that have sanctioned Russia.
The state has said that an in-house app would protect citizens from fraud and terrorism, given the large number of scammers on WhatsApp in the nation. However, restrictions on Telegram haven't gone over well domestically, even among Putin's allies, as residents along Ukraine's borders have relied on it for drone and missile alerts. "I am concerned that slowing Telegram could affect the flow of information, if the situation deteriorates," said the governor of one of those regions.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/whatsapp-is-now-fully-blocked-in-russia-110953485.html?src=rss
The UK government claims a new Telecoms Consumer Charter will stop customers being hit by unexpected bill increases and offer clearer pricing when signing up to deals.…
Imagine the moment you bring a new dog or cat into your life. That mix of excitement and responsibility. Vet visits, vaccines, learning what food suits them, managing check-ups, and always wondering how to keep them healthy as they grow. Most pet insurance only steps in after a costly accident or illness. It doesn't help you avoid the situation in the first place. Lassie's product is built around a different insight: giving owners the tools to look after their pets every day, not just when something goes wrong. Now, Stockholm-based insurtech Lassie has secured $75 million in a Series C…
This story continues at The Next Web
In a technology M&A deal, whether you are acquiring or selling a tech or software business, valuation rarely hinges on a single dimension. Financial performance, growth efficiency, and cash flow durability remain the backbone of any transaction. In practical terms, this means metrics such as revenue and ARR, retention as a proxy for revenue quality, margin structure, and capital intensity continue to anchor how buyers price risk. However, alongside these tangible indicators sits another layer of value, one that does not always surface cleanly in financial statements and may even remain invisible if it is not properly understood or articulated:…
This story continues at The Next Web
The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) is offering between £270,000 to £300,000 for a senior digital leader who will oversee more than £4.6 billion in spending and more than 3,000 specialist staff.…
Vinyl records are firmly back in rotation, but getting started does not have to mean spending a fortune or building a complicated hi-fi stack from day one. Whether you want a simple, all-in-one setup with built-in speakers or you are piecing together a more traditional system with a separate amplifier, the best record player is the one that fits how you listen at home.
For this guide, we focused on high-quality turntables under $600 that deliver a satisfying listening experience without unnecessary complexity. These picks cover everything from beginner-friendly automatic models to more audiophile-leaning decks that prioritize sound quality and upgrade potential, proving you do not need to jump into the high-end to enjoy vinyl properly.
Best record players for 2026
Other record players we tested Audio-Technica AT-LP60XBT
This is about as basic as it gets, unless you opt for the AT-LP60X which ditches the Bluetooth connectivity. This is a perfectly decent option for someone just getting into vinyl, but if you spend a little more for the AT-LP70X, you won't be in quite as big of a hurry to upgrade once you surrender to the obsession.
Cambridge Audio Alva STThe Alva ST has a refined design that made me want to keep it out in my living room longer than many of the models on this list. The controls are limited on the top to power and individual options for 33 and 45 RPM speeds. Everything else is on the back panel, including Bluetooth pairing and preamp buttons. To complete the look, Cambridge Audio opted for a 1mm aluminium top plate, which sits on an MDF plinth with a layer of EVA to absorb vibrations in between.
While the overall audio performance on the Alva ST is warm and inviting, there is a lack of detail across genres. I've noticed albums don't have a particularly wide soundstage, and songs lack their normal punch at times, so some sound compressed compared to when they're played on other turntables. Additionally, the free swinging tone arm needs more resistance so it's not so prone to dropping on a record immediately if it slips out of your fingers when you have the cueing lever down. Since this turntable is fully manual operation, I felt a bit of peril every time I went to lower the needle. (The price increased during testing for this guide.)
Denon DP-300FDenon's DP-300F is a mixed bag. On one hand, you get the convenience of fully automatic operation, dedicated speed and record size buttons and somewhat refined design. There are also some confounding decisions though, like the permanently affixed cables, the preamp switch being under the platter and the overall midrange build quality for a $500 turntable. The sound from the preamp and Denon's cartridge has a clear lack of depth and detail that almost any model at this price should offer.
How to shop for a turntableThe first question you'll need to ask yourself when looking for a turntable is how you plan to use it. Are you into vinyl for the ritual? If you simply like the concept of physical media, having to flip a record to finish it or the need to intentionally swap out an album when it's done, that's just fine. You probably can make do with a more affordable turntable since overall sound quality may not be a main concern. If you crave the warmth of analog sound, and you want the collection you've invested in to sound its best, you'll need to consider something with better specs.
You'll also need to account for where and how you're going to listen to vinyl. Are you planning to connect this turntable to headphones or Bluetooth speakers? Do you have shelf or tower speakers you're going to use? Are you willing to invest in a dedicated preamp or would you rather a new turntable come with one built in? All of these questions will impact your buying decision — even the Bluetooth codecs, if you're going the wireless route.
Best record players
Billy Steele for Engadget
Automatic, semi-auto and manual operation
If you're just getting into vinyl, an automatic turntable will save you a lot of stress. These are the models that place the stylus for you — all you have to do is push a button. When you get to the end of the record, the turntable will also return the tonearm to its resting spot automatically. Or, if you need to stop your session mid-side, there's a button for that too.
Some turntables have semi-automatic operation. Maybe they can't place the needle for you, but they do have an automatic stop when a side of a record is complete. This auto stop, which sometimes comes with an on/off switch, can prevent unnecessary wear on your stylus and vinyl. Plus, many turntables with automatic operation allow you to take control if you need to drop the stylus in a certain place (that's not the beginning of the record) or if you have a die-cut vinyl (like the It's the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown soundtrack).
Then there's the fully manual option. Here, you're solely responsible for placing the tonearm and taking it off when the music stops. A lot of turntables have a cue lever to assist with the process, and a lot of tonearms have a mechanism that lowers them slowly rather than violently dropping them on a record. This adds one more step to the ritual, and it's one many purists prefer.
PreampThe biggest decision you'll need to make in terms of a preamp is to decide if you want one built into your turntable or if you'd rather use a separate one. It can be very convenient, especially for beginners, to use a built-in component to amplify the signal from the turntable before it hits any speakers or headphones. The downside is that you're left with what the company provides from the factory, so if you're looking to upgrade, you'll have to disable the preamp inside. On most turntables, there's a switch that allows you to do this, so it's no trouble. But, opting to skip the preamp on some models could save you money that could be invested elsewhere.
A dedicated preamp typically uses higher-quality components and reduces noise by keeping internal parts properly separated. More robust models may even provide controls for things like tone or multiple inputs, while the basic options will simply allow you to plug in, play and forget it. If you're after the best possible clarity and realism from your record collection, we'd recommend a dedicated preamp right from the start.
Best record players
Billy Steele for Engadget
Removable cartridge/headshell
The next item you'll want to consider is if the turntable you're eyeing can be upgraded in the future. The best way to do this is by swapping out the cartridge. Most turntables allow you to do this but there are some that don't, so you'll need to pay attention to this detail. Upgrading the cartridge down the road is a great way to improve overall sound quality without having to buy a new turntable, new speakers or a new amp.
Belt drive vs. direct driveThere are two main types of turntables: belt drive and direct drive. All of the models we tested for this guide are belt drive, which means there's a thin belt that connects the platter to the motor to make the thing spin. Direct drive turntables are widely used by DJs and Technics was the first to make them. Here, the motor is directly under the platter and connected to it directly so the setup is less prone to wearing out. This is especially key when you're doing things like scratching. Direct-drive turntables tend to be more expensive than their belt-driven counterparts.
Counterweight and anti-skate controlMost turntables will include a counterweight on the tonearm and some form of anti-skate control. Both of these help keep the stylus in place with the correct amount of pressure, all to ensure proper operation with minimal wear on your records. Sometimes the anti-skate elements are built into the tonearm while other models offer a dedicated dial on the surface of the plinth. The ability to adjust both of these can help you fine-tune the performance of your turntable over time, which may be necessary after upgrading the cartridge or other components.
Other components to considerSome final items you'll want to evaluate on a prospective turntable purchase include the materials used for the base (plinth), platter and even the feet. Cheaper turntables may be mostly plastic affairs while more expensive models can use solid MDF (medium-density fibreboard) for the plinth. A lot of turntables have aluminum platters with a felt pad while others may feature a thick acrylic version. And while entry-level turntables may have small, plastic feet, premium models come with larger, adjustable, rubberized feet for better vibration isolation. While some of these come down to personal preference — a frosted acrylic platter looks really nice — there are some performance boosts to be gained depending on how the company uses the components.
How we test turntablesSince most turntables under $600 meet the criteria for entry-level through midrange, we tested every model with a set of Audio-Technica AT-SP3X powered speakers. These offer balanced sound for turntables with a 1.1-inch tweeter and 3-inch woofer in each unit. And at $269, they won't break the bank if you need speakers for your new turntable and they'll provide ample sound performance even if you spend more than our budget on a new deck.
For all of our test units that didn't have a built-in preamp, we used the Fluance PA-10. At $100, it's an affordable upgrade if you're looking to bypass a turntable's included components or if you're looking to go more analog with your turntable purchase. There are no buttons or controls, just connect your turntable, speakers and ground wire (if you're using one) and you're ready to go. It's simple, straightforward and inexpensive, so it's a great option for beginners and more experienced vinyl collectors alike.
In terms of performance testing, we play a variety of genres on each turntable to evaluate sound quality. We also carefully examine the overall experience of putting a record on, setting the speed, placing the tonearm and more, which allows us to judge how well each turntable will work for users at different experience levels. Lastly, we take notes on design and components, comparing those elements from each turntable with our other test subjects to make our recommendations.
Apple's in-house studio will be producing the future seasons of Severance, according to Deadline. The company has reportedly acquired the show's IP and all rights from its original studio, Fifth Season, back in December in a deal that was worth approximately $70 million. Fifth Season will remain as an executive producer, but Apple Studios will now be in charge of the show. Severance will be one of Apple's marquee titles, alongside other shows like Owen Wilson's Stick and Kristen Wiig's Palm Royale. Apple also previously acquired sci-fi dystopian series Silo after its first season.
Deadline reports that the show's production costs were going beyond what Fifth Season could afford. The studio had already asked Apple for advances in the past and was considering moving the production from New York to Canada for bigger tax rebates. Apple has also apparently been helping Fifth Season not just with its budget, but also with securing advertisers.
Seeing as the second season of Severance became the streamer's most watched series, and Apple definitely has the money to keep the show going, the company decided to take over the series completely. It will allow Severance's production to stay in New York without having to worry about budget constraints. Deadline says the series is expected to have four seasons, with the spinoffs showrunner Dan Erickson and director Ben Stiller are open to now being in the realm of possibility.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/entertainment/streaming/apple-acquires-severance-and-will-produce-future-seasons-in-house-092405747.html?src=rss
Most UK government departments have spent little or nothing with social media platform X since July 2024 following an unpublished 2023 evaluation by the Cabinet Office. But the Department for Education has bucked the trend, spending £27,118.…
A Chinese government hacking group that has been sanctioned for targeting America's critical infrastructure used Google's AI chatbot, Gemini, to auto-analyze vulnerabilities and plan cyberattacks against US organizations, the company says.…
APRICOT 2026 Starlink can sometimes shift data more quickly than is possible on terrestrial networks, and improves connectivity in remote areas. But the space broadband service also presents new technical and regulatory challenges, according to speakers who took to the stage on Tuesday at the Asia Pacific Regional Internet Conference on Operational Technologies (APRICOT) in Jakarta, Indonesia.…
I want to say a little something upfront in this post, so that there is no misunderstanding. While I've spent a great deal of time outlining why I think RFK Jr. and his cadre of buffoons at HHS and its child agencies are horrible for America and her people's health, I do understand some of the perspective from people who pushback on vaccinations some of the time. One of those areas are vaccine mandates. Bodily autonomy is and ought to be a very real thing. A government installing mandates for what can and can't be done with one's own body is something that needs to be treated with a ton of sensitivity and I can understand why vaccine mandates in general might run afoul of the autonomy concept. Of course, it's also why the government shouldn't be in the business of telling women what to do with their bodies, or blanket outlawing things like euthanasia, but the point is I get it.
But there are times when we, as a society, do make some legal demands of the citizenry when it comes to their own physical beings for the betterment of the whole. Not all drugs are federally legal because there are some drugs that, if they were to proliferate, would cause enormous harm to the public that surrounds those individuals. The government does regulate to some extent what appears in our food and medicine, never bothering to ask the public their opinion on the matter. And there are some diseases so horrible that we've built some level of a mandate around vaccination, traditionally, especially in exchange for participation in publicly funded schools and the like.
Dr. Oz, television personality turned Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, has vocally opposed vaccine mandates in general terms. When Florida dropped the requirement for vaccines for public school children, Oz cheered them on.
In an interview on "The Story with Martha MacCallum," the Fox News host asked Oz whether he agrees with officials who want to make Florida the first state in the nation to end childhood vaccine requirements and whether Oz would "recommend the same thing to your patients."
"I would definitely not have mandates for vaccinations," the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator told MacCallum. "This is a decision that a physician and a patient should be making together," he continued. "The parents love their kids more than anybody else could love that kid, so why not let the parents play an active role in this?"
The MMR vaccine was one of those required for Florida schools. So, Oz is remarkably clear in the quote above. The government should not be mandating vaccines. Further, the government shouldn't really have direct input into whether people are getting vaccines or not. That decision should be made strictly by the patient and the doctor who has that patient directly in front of them, or their parents.
Those comments from Oz were made in September of 2025. Fast forward to the present, with a measles outbreak that is completely off the rails in America, and the good doctor is singing a much different tune.
So, Oz is now reduced to begging people to get vaccinated for something that, for decades, everyone routinely got vaccinated for.
"Take the vaccine, please. We have a solution for our problem," he said. "Not all illnesses are equally dangerous and not all people are equally susceptible to those illnesses," he hedged. "But measles is one you should get your vaccine."
To be clear, he's still not advocating for any sort of mandate. Which is unfortunate, at least when it comes to targeted mandates for public schools and that sort of thing. But in lieu of any actual public policy to combat measles in America, he's reduced to a combination of begging the public to get vaccinated and telling the general public that a measles shot is definitely one they should be getting.
And on that he's right. But he's also talking out of both sides of his mouth. Oz isn't these people's doctor. These school children aren't all sitting directly in front of him. So the same person who advocated for a personalized approach to vaccines is now begging the public to take the measles vaccine from Washington D. C.
That inconsistency is among the many reasons it's difficult to know just how seriously to take Oz. And consistency is pretty damned key when it comes to government messaging on public health policy. That, in addition to trust, is everything here. And when Oz jumps onto a CNN broadcast to claim that this government, including RFK Jr., have been at the forefront of advocating for the measles vaccine, any trust that is there is torpedoed pretty quickly.
CNN anchor Dana Bash was left in disbelief as one of the president's top health goons claimed the MAGA administration was a top advocate for vaccines. Addressing the record outbreak of measles in the U.S., particularly in South Carolina, Bash asked Dr. Mehmet Oz on State of the Union Sunday: "Is this a consequence of the administration undermining support for advocacy for measles and other vaccines?" "I don't believe so," the Trump-appointed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator responded. He then said, "We've advocated for measles vaccines all along. Secretary Kennedy has been at the very front of this."
Absolute nonsense. Yes, Kennedy has said to get the measles vaccine. He's also said maybe everyone should just get measles instead. One of his deputies has hand-waved the outbreak away as being no big deal. Kennedy has advocated for alternative treatments, rather than vaccination.
The government is all over the place on this, in other words. As is Oz himself, in some respects. To sit here in the midst of the worst measles outbreak in decades, beg people to do the one thing that will make this all go away, and then claim that this government has been on the forefront of vaccine advocacy is simply silly.
Cisco has increased the prices for its hardware to cover the increased cost of memory and says the resulting bigger bills are not changing customers' buying habits.…
Artificial intelligence promises to change not just how Americans work, but how societies decide which kinds of work are worthwhile in the first place. When technological change outpaces social judgment, a major capacity of a sophisticated society comes under pressure: the ability to sustain forms of work whose value is not obvious in advance and cannot be justified by necessity alone.
As AI systems diffuse rapidly across the economy, questions about how societies legitimate such work, and how these activities can serve as a supplement to market-based job creation, have taken on a policy relevance that deserves serious attention.
From Prayer to Platforms
That capacity for legitimating work has historically depended in part on how societies deploy economic surplus: the share of resources that can be devoted to activities not strictly required for material survival. In late medieval England, for example, many in the orbit of the church made at least part of their living performing spiritual labor such as saying prayers for the dead and requesting intercessions for patrons. In a society where salvation was a widely shared concern, such activities were broadly accepted as legitimate ways to make a living.
William Langland was one such prayer-sayer. He is known to history only because, unlike nearly all others who did similar work, he left behind a long allegorical religious poem, Piers Plowman, which he composed and repeatedly revised alongside the devotional labor that sustained him. It emerged from the same moral and institutional world in which paid prayer could legitimately absorb time, effort, and resources.
In 21st-century America, Jenny Nicholson earns a sizeable income sitting alone in front of a camera, producing long-form video essays on theme parks, films, and internet subcultures. Yet her audience supports it willingly and few doubt that it creates value of a kind. Where Langland's livelihood depended on shared theological and moral authority emanating from a Church that was the dominant institution of its day, Nicholson's depends on a different but equally real form of judgment expressed by individual market participants. And she is just one example of a broader class of creators—streamers, influencers, and professional gamers—whose work would have been unintelligible as a profession until recently.
What links Langland and Nicholson is not the substance of their work or any claim of moral equivalence, but the shared social judgment that certain activities are legitimate uses of economic surplus. Such judgments do more than reflect cultural taste. Historically, they have also shaped how societies adjust to technological change, by determining which forms of work can plausibly claim support when productivity rises faster than what is considered a "necessity" by society.
How Change Gets Absorbed
Technological change has long been understood to generate economic adjustment through familiar mechanisms: by creating new tasks within firms, expanding demand for improved goods and services, and recombining labor in complementary ways. Often, these mechanisms alone can explain how economies create new jobs when technology renders others obsolete. Their operation is well documented, and policies that reduce frictions in these processes—encouraging retraining or easing the entry of innovative firms—remain important in any period of change.
That said, there is no general law guaranteeing that new technologies will create more jobs than they destroy through these mechanisms alone. Alongside labor-market adjustment, societies have also adapted by legitimating new forms of value—activities like those undertaken by Langland and Nicholson—that came to be supported as worthwhile uses of the surplus generated by rising productivity.
This process has typically been examined not as a mechanism of economic adjustment, but through a critical or moralizing lens. From Thorstein Veblen's account of conspicuous consumption, which treats surplus-supported activity primarily as a vehicle for status competition, to Max Weber's analysis of how moral and religious worldviews legitimate economic behavior, scholars have often emphasized the symbolic and ideological dimensions of non-essential work. Herbert Marcuse pushed this line of thinking further, arguing that capitalist societies manufacture "false needs" to absorb surplus and assure the continuation of power imbalances. These perspectives offer real insight: uses of surplus are not morally neutral, and new forms of value can be entangled with power, hierarchy, and exclusion.
What they often exclude, however, is the way legitimation of new forms of value can also function to allow societies to absorb technological change without requiring increases in productivity to be translated immediately into conventional employment or consumption. New and expanded ways of using surplus are, in this sense, a critical economic safety valve during periods of rapid change.
Skilled Labor Has Been Here Before
Fears that artificial intelligence is uniquely threatening simply because it reaches into professional or cognitive domains rest on a mistaken historical premise. Episodes of large-scale technological displacement have rarely spared skilled or high-paid forms of labor; often, such work has been among the first affected. The mechanization of craft production in the nineteenth century displaced skilled cobblers, coopers, and blacksmiths, replacing independent artisans with factory systems that required fewer skills, paid lower wages, and offered less autonomy even as new skilled jobs arose elsewhere. These changes were disruptive but they were absorbed largely through falling prices, rising consumption, and new patterns of employment. They did not require societies to reconsider what kinds of activity were worthy uses of surplus: the same things were still produced, just at scale.
Other episodes are more revealing for present purposes. Sometimes, social change has unsettled not just particular occupations but entire regimes through which uses of surplus become legitimate. In medieval Europe, the Church was the one of the largest economic institutions just about everywhere, clerical and quasi-clerical roles like Langland's offered recognized paths to education, security, status, and even wealth. When those shared beliefs fractured, the Church's economic role contracted sharply—not because productivity gains ceased but because its claim on so large a share of surplus lost legitimacy.
To date, artificial intelligence has not produced large-scale job displacement, and the limited disruptions that have occurred have largely been absorbed through familiar adjustment mechanisms. But if AI systems begin to substitute for work whose value is justified less by necessity than by judgment or cultural recognition, the more relevant historical analogue may be less the mechanization of craft than the narrowing or collapse of earlier surplus regimes. The central question such technologies raise is not whether skilled labor can be displaced or whether large-scale displacement is possible—both have occurred repeatedly in the historical record—but how quickly societies can renegotiate which activities they are prepared to treat as legitimate uses of surplus when change arrives at unusual speed.
Time Compression and its Stakes
In this respect, artificial intelligence does appear unusual. Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT have diffused through society at a pace far faster than most earlier general-purpose technologies. ChatGPT was widely reported to have reached roughly 100 million users within two months of its public release and similar tools have shown comparably rapid uptake.
That compression matters. Much surplus has historically flowed through familiar institutions—universities, churches, museums, and other cultural bodies—that legitimate activities whose value lies in learning, spiritual rewards or meaning rather than immediate output. Yet such institutions are not fixed. Periods of rapid technological change often place them under strain-something evident today for many-exposing disagreements about purpose and authority. Under these conditions, experimentation with new forms of surplus becomes more important, not less. Most proposed new forms of value fail, and attempts to predict which will succeed have a poor historical record—from the South Sea Bubble to more recent efforts to anoint digital assets like NFTs as durable sources of wealth. Experimentation is not a guarantee of success; it is a hedge. Not all claims on surplus are benign, and waste is not harmless. But when technological change moves faster than institutional consensus, the greater danger often lies not in tolerating too many experiments, but in foreclosing them too quickly.
Artificial intelligence does not require discarding all existing theories of change. What sets modern times apart is the speed with which new capabilities become widespread, shortening the interval in which those judgments are formed. In this context, surplus that once supported meaningful, if unconventional, work may instead be captured by grifters, legally barred from legitimacy (by say, outlawing a new art form) or funneled into bubbles. The risk is not waste alone, but the erosion of the cultural and institutional buffers that make adaptation possible.
The challenge for policymakers is not to pre-ordain which new forms of value deserve support but to protect the space in which judgment can evolve. They need to realize that they simply cannot make the world entirely safe, legible and predictable: whether they fear technology overall or simply seek to shape it in the "right" way, they will not be able to predict the future. That means tolerating ambiguity and accepting that many experiments will fail with negative consequences. In this context, broader social barriers that prevent innovation in any field-professional licensing, limits on free expression, overly zealous IP laws, regulatory bars on the entry to small firms-deserve a great deal of scrutiny. Even if the particular barriers in question have nothing to do with AI itself, they may retard the development of surplus sinks necessary to economic adjustment. In a period of compressed adjustment, the capacity to let surplus breathe and value be contested may well determine whether economies bend or break.
Eli Lehrer is the President of the R Street Institute.
Sky News has run a frankly deranged — and antisemitic — article that attempts to demonise Brighton's anti-genocide activists. To the educated eye, it reads like an extract from an Israel lobby playbook. This should perhaps not surprise. Antisemitism is rife in the British media — just not in the way audiences are routinely told to expect.
The article features a seven-minute video that Sky also shared on its social media. The video barely bothers even to 'both-sides' the issue. It gives no more than a cursory nod to the idea that activists asking Brighton households to boycott Israeli products might not be antisemitic. Then it goes on to showcase, at length, the 'fears' — its interviewees seem anything but afraid, of course — of 'the Jewish community' at these supposedly terrifying young people and their clipboards:
Sky's @LisaAtSky reports from Brighton, where volunteers are going door-to-door asking people to boycott Israeli products.
Brighton's Jewish community fear the actions of these volunteers could encourage antisemitism.
An ablative heat shield is a protective system that jettisons material to dissipate heat from the underlying structure. They're used on oil rigs and spacecraft. And in politics.
Boris Johnson used Matt Hancock as one. After failing to turn up at Cobra meetings, Johnson and his government discharged Covid-infected patients into care homes, causing thousands of early deaths. His callous "let the bodies pile high" comments and corrupt VIP WhatsApp lanes left him in the firing line. So he sacked health secretary Matt Hancock. Not for incompetence, but in a conveniently leaked video where Hancock snogs a woman he was having an affair with in his office. He'd appointed her to a £15,000 paid non-exec director role, too. Johnson could then jettison the Hancock liability without drawing attention to the Covid fiascos.
Hancock kept his £91,346 MP's salary. And took his £16,000 ministerial resignation payout. And £320,000 for going on I'm a Celebrity. If you'd been sacked for corruption, inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, and lethal incompetence, how much would your golden parachute be?
We should ask the same question about Morgan McSweeney.
McSweeney: gone but not forgottenThose rich donors colonising our public services will see him right. His media mates are trying to rehabilitate him already - Guardian articles saying he was the genius who "masterminded landslide 2024 election win". What rubbish. Johnson created chaos without any help from McSweeney. A lettuce beat Liz Truss. The Tories handed Labour their loveless landslide. McSweeney's efforts lowered the Labour vote.
The whole Starmer project, engineered by the likes of Mandelson and McSweeney, is a big gravy train of corruption. Starmer is right in the middle of it. They were aided and abetted by client journalists.
Do you remember when Keir Starmer was "forensic"? That didn't last long. Then they were the "grown ups". Making "tough decisions". Like accepting £100,000 of freebies. They're trying to rehabilitate him how. He is a "decent" man who was "lied to" by that nasty Peter Mandelson. How could they have known that a man who resigned twice for corruption was corrupt?
After Mandelson's second ministerial resignation, Tony Blair appointed him as Britain's EU Commissioner. In 2008 the story broke about Mandelson meeting billionaires Oleg Deripaska and Natheniel Rothschild on an £80 million yacht. Along with George Osborne. Deripaska owned the world's largest aluminium business. Mandelson had lowered EU tariffs on aluminium from 6% to 3%, worth tens of millions of pounds to Deripaska. I found that in a Google search.
What a geniusIn 2023 the McSweeney faction manoeuvred to stop Labour members from being allowed to select me to continue as Mayor. Starmer said "we want the highest quality of candidates." A lobby journalist told me, "It's amazing - they're blocking you who's actually done some good and Peter Mandelson, who's best mates with Jeffrey Epstein, still has influence." That was 18 months before Starmer appointed Mandelson as ambassador to the US. If journalists knew, the Cabinet Office Security Vetting service knew. Which meant Starmer knew.
So what they will try next is to say it's just one rotten apple. Mandelson was dodgy. And while McSweeney was ambitious, he was just serving his party. And Starmer, when he resigns, will be rehabilitated as a decent chap, just too honest and straight laced. Which is total hogwash. They are all up to their elbows in it. And have normalised it. These are not merely three weak individuals, unable to control their greed. The system attracts and rewards and promotes these characters. The Labour right is a machine that transfers our money to very rich people.
The Tony Blair Foundation took £257 million from Larry Ellison, whose Oracle firm is hawking AI to governments. Shortly afterwards, Starmer announced 18,000 NHS England redundancies, which would be filled by AI. There are legions of other examples.
Governments will struggleI was on BBC Politics North this weekend. I was asked about why left behind towns in the North East were struggling.
Low wages, poor transport and a shortage of good jobs persist year after year. The underlying cause, I said, it the money being taken out of these places. In the North East alone, Northumbria Water made £291 million profit last year. All disappears off to a Hong Kong billionaire. Northern PowerGrid North East, £333 million profit last year, all disappears off to a North American billionaire. That money reinvested here would create more work, more jobs, more money circulating in our local economy. That's just two privatised utilities. Add in banks, finance, land ownership, care homes, big tech - and we're a debt farm built to enrich billionaires. Our money is going to people on big yachts, not small boats.
No government will be popular until this is fixed. They only reason Starmer is still in post is Labour MPs are waiting until after May's local election wipe out to jettison him like an ablative heat shield. No new leader wants a catastrophic defeat in their inbox.
Public ownership is immensely popular. It would be simple to do. It costs effectively nothing - just enforce the regulations, and the share price will plummet to zero. So the real question is why won't a struggling Labour government do it?
The only way is Green after McSweeney and LabourI joined the Green Party because they will. Over 130,000 people have made the same decision. In Newcastle we'll take swathes of seats from Labour. It's shaping up to be a straight fight between the Greens and Reform, just like the Gorton and Denton by-election. The Greens will reverse wealth extraction. Reform will turbocharge it, like a vacuum hose sucking money from your bank account.
The cracks in the neo-Labour edifice are growing. So one cheer for the demise of Mandelson and McSweeney. But I'll keep the other two back for when we get a government that serves the people.
Featured image via the Canary
Amid its ongoing promotion of AI's wonders, Microsoft has warned customers it has found many instances of a technique that manipulates the technology to produce biased advice.…
Blizzard announced today that it is introducing the Warlock as a playable character to Diablo II: Resurrected. It brings the first new class in 25 years to this remaster of the original RPG. It's part of the Reign of the Warlock DLC, which is available today and will run you $25. It also includes some other updates to the base game, including new items and a new pinnacle boss encounter against the Colossal Ancients. For those players who don't already own the base game, you can also pick up the Infernal Edition of D2R for $40, which includes the new content.
When D2R launched in 2021, it was an impressively faithful recreation of the game that so many Blizzard fans continued to adore over the years. Bringing in a whole new player class is a big win for those players who have stuck with the game in its contemporary era.
If D2R isn't your jam, though, Warlock is also being added to both Diablo 4 in its upcoming Lord of Hatred expansion this April and to Diablo Immortal. So aside from Diablo 3 not getting much love, just about all fans of the franchise will have a chance to get into the demon-summoning groove. Blizzard's 30th anniversary showcase video has all the details about what the other Diablo titles have in store during this year.
Blizzard has been keeping the news and updates rolling over the past few weeks in honor of the company's 35th anniversary. One of the more notable updates came for team hero shooter Overwatch, which lost the 2 in its name, but gained five more heroes in its big update yesterday.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/diablo-ii-resurrected-is-adding-warlock-as-a-brand-new-player-class-000130003.html?src=rss
I'm still getting used to this life. Walking through Birmingham International train station at 8am on Wednesday 4 February to the NEC, sleep-deprived. A stranger clocks me. A double-take. I'm imagining things. Oh wait. No. He's following, phone raised, snapping pictures. Earpiece? Check. ID? None. A plain-clothes somebody, or nobody.
We're expecting trouble later
A flimsy justification when challenged before scuttling off. I wish I'd thought to record it, but like I say, I'm getting used to this still.
I was at the National Exhibition Centre (NEC) in Birmingham. In-between hosting Springfair and The Artisanal Food and Ice Cream Show 2026, management are desperately trying to pull off the most delicate and audacious of audacious magic tricks. They're both trying to host the SDSC Arms Convention whilst simultaneously making sure nobody notices.
Of course, local activists were intent on shining a light on proceedings. The arms fair has moved from Telford due to protests - but where the arms go, the people follow. And, based on how hard it was to even find, the NEC was clearly aware of the PR implications.
Security was obviously tight. I arrived on Tuesday to find protesters, quite literally penned in on a piece of grass outside. Security took turns escorting them to the toilets every half hour, and one person was periodically chaperoned to get hot drinks. At one point, it wasn't clear if I'd even be permitted back through the building to the station. Fortunately, sense prevailed so I abused my press pass to visit the ice cream convention on the way back through.
Birmingham NEC: murder in the morning. Ice cream in the arvo.It was surreal: just a couple of walls stood between people peddling death and the best pistachio ice cream I've ever eaten.
People posed for pictures with the Ben & Jerry's cow, tens of metres away from… well, that's part of the problem. It's hard to say what's going on in there. I applied for a press ticket but never got a reply. Walking through the centre, the silence was deafening: Springfair branding everywhere, toys and games. The ice cream convention spelled out in huge gold lettering…
But nothing for the weapons fair. How odd! Almost like they were ashamed…
It was a theme. The sheer number of people who told me they were 'there for the ice cream', only to duck into the weapons convention, was laughable. If you're going to a weapons fair, own it. If you're ashamed, why go? And it's the same for Birmingham NEC. If they are ashamed of hosting it, why do it? Do they believe in the cause? Do they think it's okay to sell munitions that blow up people on the other side of the world? If so, why not write it in three-foot gold letters? Why did security ask me - belatedly - not to photograph the welcome sign in the window?
Scared of some hippies and drums
And why police a protest of tree-huggers and hippies as if they're a dire threat? It was ridiculous. Security seemed genuinely surprised people weren't grateful to be herded to the toilets. Since when is that normal? I've been going to protests for years. I've never seen a venue behave this way.
On Wednesday, arriving protesters were met by security escorts. They "didn't want people to get lost." Okay.
By 9:30am, several activists were physically carried out for handing out leaflets and dumped at the entrance.
EMBED VIDEO
Security in general was farcical. Please don't photograph those windows? Bit late for that bud. You honestly think the first thing I did when I landed Tuesday wasn't to take a picture of the huge fuck off "welcome" sign?
EBMED VIDEO
I want to the very clear, I don't think that people wearing yellow bibs, earning minimum wage while standing in the cold should be the target. It's not their fault their bosses are shit. Most probably agree that bombing kids is a shitty thing to do. People don't get an option about their engagement with a coercive capitalist system that demands blood sacrifice every week in exchange for the basic necessities needed to keep existing.
The ones sharing photos with the police; the ones laughing while making propeller motions at a staged die in highlighting the use of drones in the genocide ongoing in Gaza? That's another matter. When, as was relayed to me, one of the security managers went out of his way to tell protesters he knew where they are from because he saw them in a right wing auditors videos… When another walks up to an NUJ journalist and tries to intimidate them by quietly telling them how much they enjoyed the pictures on their Instagram? Yeah, fuck those guys. Royally and sideways. They deserve some shit being flung at them.
Back to the protestIn the pen, the XR drummers arrived. The promised snow hadn't materialised and spirits were high, waiting for reinforcements. The final straw for security arrived just after one o'clock from Birmingham New Street; The Red Rebel Brigade. Once they had made their way through the centre and reached the protest site, the doors slammed shut. Clearly too much publicity. Apparently there were now "too many people". Who the fuck is that scared of 7 people in velvet bath robes?
A bus arrived. Protesters were huddled and told there would be no more access; everyone would have to walk the long way around or be driven. The day was cut short. Those who walked were led through car parks out of sight of the public to the station. Everything organised to avoid anyone ever realising that theres death being bought and sold here or that anyone was opposed to that notion.
That's what this is about. The Birmingham NEC; a British institution trying desperately to eat its cake and then still have it; to host these events but avoid any scrutiny for having done so. Nestled in one of the most authentically working-class areas of the country; being pimped out to the highest bidder. Hiding its complicity behind free spoons of gelato. What would Ben & Jerry's say? We couldn't reach them for comment, but I think it's a fucking disgrace.
Industrial levels of incompetence on display for all to see at Birmingham NECThe handling of this protest is a recurring theme. The decision-makers aren't bad people by default - generally they are just really bad at their jobs. How anyone thinks this is the way to manage PR is beyond me. I find myself screaming "Barbara Streisand" in my head a lot.
It's all so counter-productive. All this bollocks about "facilitating a protest"… You're trying to minimise and hide it. And worse - attempting to intimidate journalists? What would have happened if you'd just allowed it? Some people would have banged drums, walked around in red gowns, and caught a train home. There isn't much to write about there.
But when you go out of your way to hide it, badly, you turn it into a story. When you stalk a journalist's Instagram, it's pretty weak. This is snowflake behaviour. From people hosting international arms dealers.
If the Birmingham NEC is hosting the SDSC Arms Convention, they should be proud enough to shout it from the rooftops. It should be on flags, banners, and their website. It shouldn't be hidden between plush toys and Ben & Jerry's.
And they shouldn't be afraid of people asking basic questions about the ethics of hosting an event that sells weapons. Those weapons aren't getting made for shits and giggles. They aren't getting made for fun; they are made to be used. To be dropped on people in Gaza and to be shot at people in Kashmir and Sudan. They kill people and the Birmingham NEC has their blood on its hands.
The NEC had not responded to a request for comment at the time of publication.
Featured images via Barold
By Barold
Model-maker and SaaS-y AI outfit Anthropic has committed to covering any increases in energy prices paid by consumers caused by its power-hungry datacenters.…
The Social Justice Party (SJP) has been supportive of Your Party (YP). But it has also raised some concerns about accountability for rule-breaking, telling the Canary it wants YP to:
urgently conduct an internal investigation into a serious allegation that a Your Party conference organiser abused their authority and deliberately broke the sortition rules.
The SJP clarified that its own elected representatives have:
been involved in discussions with like minded groups, such as The Collective, about building a new party of the left since 2024.
And it added that:
SJP members want Your Party to flourish and in order to do that it must operate in a manner that is fair, democratic and transparent.
The allegation of rule-breaking comes amid Your Party's elections for its first Central Executive Committee (CEC). There have also been concerns about transparency and accountability during this process.
Alleged rule-breaking at Your Party's founding conferenceMembers wanting to attend November's founding conference in Liverpool had to go through a sortition process, with YP's website saying this sought to:
assemble a representative group of people by effectively drawing lots, giving everyone an equal chance of being chosen
The SJP, however, discovered that one of its former members had:
received a personal invite from a conference organiser to attend Your Party's Founding Conference.
This was despite the sortition process not choosing this member.
The SJP undertook an internal investigation, which:
concluded that it was beyond reasonable doubt that a Your Party conference organiser had broken the sortition rules
SJP chair Eric Barnes told us that, when the member arrived at the conference, they were allegedly:
issued with a pre-written speech and advised where to sit in the conference hall - in the same section as sortitioned participants - in order to maximise their chances of being selected to speak during a conference debate
A conference organiser, meanwhile, had also:
SJP will officially complain after CEC electionarranged for them to stay in a hotel and offered to pay for their accommodation and travel expenses. Although the SJP member did not actually speak during a conference debate they said that they were aware of another non-sortitioned person, who also gained access to the conference floor via a personal invite, who did speak
The SJP told us that it doesn't currently "have confidence" that an official complaint to Your Party would receive fair and impartial attention, because:
At present Your Party is controlled by a small group of unelected people overseeing processes that as yet have not been formally agreed.
The party believed it was in YP members' interests to comment now because:
Your Party is intending to use sortition as a mechanism for future member voting purposes, therefore Your Party members need to be aware of potential interference.
And it confirmed it:
will be submitting a formal complaint to Your Party once the new CEC leadership team has been elected enabling them to carry out their own investigation.
It explained why, saying:
Rule 7.1 of Your Party's interim membership rules states 'Members must not act in any way that brings the Party into disrepute'.
The SJP are concerned that a Your Party conference organiser broke the sortition rule, which is clearly an act that would bring the party into disrepute, and will be pursuing this complaint until it is satisfactorily resolved.
Barnes also expressed concern that these rule breaches may not have been the only ones. And he insisted:
It is even more galling that properly sortitioned delegates were barred from conference because they were deemed to be members of another political party. We trust that the new CEC will bring an end to these backroom manoeuvres and set Your Party on a path of genuine democracy.
The Canary approached Your Party for comment on these allegations, but received no response by the time of publication.
Featured image via the Canary
By The Canary
As the US blocks countries from sending oil to Cuba, it has also made sure that Venezuelan oil gets to Israel for the first time in years.
US diverting Venezuelan oil away from Cuba, and towards IsraelAfter Washington's illegal invasion of Venezuela in early January 2026, during which it abducted the country's president Nicolás Maduro, the US took control of the oil leaving the Latin American nation. That meant it could ensure once and for all that Venezuelan oil wouldn't go to Cuba anymore.
But this imperialist oil game wasn't just about strangling Cuba, apparently. It was also about ensuring Venezuela's oil could go to US allies, like the genocidal settler-colonial state of Israel. As Drop Site News has reported, the US has now overseen:
a crude oil cargo to Bazan Group, Israel's largest refinery.
The US has also received oil, along with India, currently under the far-right government of Narendra Modi, and Europe.
Colombia's socialist president Gustavo Petro has been in the US's crosshairs since he denounced Trump and his "clan of paedophiles" for abducting Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro.
Today, he narrowly avoided assassination when attackers overran the planned landing site for the helicopter in which he and his family were travelling.
Petro later described how the family had to fly out to sea for hours before finding a safe place:
https://www.thecanary.co/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/ORTm4fT9muUgFGgt.mp4
No group has yet claimed responsibility, leaving open the likelihood of another US-sponsored murder attempt, ignored by most western media.
Featured image via the Canary
By Skwawkbox
Peter Mandelson—the former UK cabinet minister who was just sacked as Britain's ambassador to the United States over newly revealed emails with Jeffrey Epstein—has found a novel way to avoid answering questions about why he told a convicted sex offender "your friends stay with you and love you" and urged him to "fight for early release." He got the UK press regulator to send a memo to all UK media essentially telling them to leave him alone.
The National published what they describe as the "secret notice" that went out:
CONFIDENTIAL - STRICTLY NOT FOR PUBLICATION: Ipso has asked us to circulate the following advisory:
Ipso has today been contacted by a representative acting on behalf of Peter Mandelson.
Mr Mandelson's representatives state that he does not wish to speak to the media at this time. He requests that the press do not take photos or film, approach, or contact him via phone, email, or in-person. His representatives ask that any requests for his comment are directed to [REDACTED]
We are happy to make editors aware of his request. We note the terms of Clause 2 (Privacy) and 3 (Harassment) of the Editors' Code, and in particular that Clause 3 states that journalists must not persist in questioning, telephoning, pursuing or photographing individuals once asked to desist, unless justified in the public interest.
Clauses 2 and 3 of the UK Editor's Code—the privacy and harassment provisions—exist primarily to protect genuinely vulnerable people from press intrusion. Grieving families. Crime victims. People suffering genuine harassment.
Mandelson is invoking them to avoid answering questions about his documented friendship with one of history's most notorious pedophiles—a friendship so extensive and problematic that it just cost him his job as ambassador to the United States, days before a presidential state visit.
According to Politico, the UK Foreign Office withdrew Mandelson "with immediate effect" after emails showed the relationship was far deeper than previously known:
In a statement the U.K. Foreign Office said Mandelson had been withdrawn as ambassador "with immediate effect" after emails showed "the depth and extent" of his relationship with Epstein was "materially different from that known at the time of his appointment."
"In particular Peter Mandelson's suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein's first conviction was wrongful and should be challenged is new information," the statement added.
So we have a senior political figure who just got fired over revelations that he told a convicted sex offender his prosecution was "wrongful" and should be challenged, who maintained this friendship for years longer than he'd admitted, and his response is to invoke press harassment protections?
The notice does include the important qualifier "unless justified in the public interest." And it's hard to imagine a clearer case of public interest: a senior diplomat, just sacked from his post, over previously undisclosed communications with a convicted pedophile, in which he expressed support for challenging that pedophile's conviction. If that's not public interest, the term has no meaning.
But the mere act of circulating this notice creates a chilling effect. It puts journalists on notice that pursuing this story could result in complaints to the regulator. It's using the machinery of press regulation as a shield against legitimate accountability journalism.
Now, to be fair, one could imagine scenarios where even a disgraced public figure might legitimately invoke harassment protections—it wasn't that long ago there was a whole scandal in the UK with journalists hacking the voicemails of famous people. But that's not what's happening here. Mandelson is invoking these provisions to avoid being asked questions at all. "Please don't inquire about why I told a convicted pedophile his prosecution was wrongful" is not the kind of harm these rules were designed to prevent.
This is who Mandelson has always been: someone who sees regulatory and governmental machinery as tools to be deployed on behalf of whoever he's serving at the moment. Back in 2009, we covered how he returned from a vacation with entertainment industry mogul David Geffen and almost immediately started pushing for aggressive new copyright enforcement measures, including kicking people off the internet for file sharing. As we wrote at the time, he had what we called a "sudden conversion" to Hollywood's position on internet enforcement that happened to coincide suspiciously with his socializing with entertainment industry executives.
Back then, the machinery was deployed to serve entertainment executives who wanted harsher copyright enforcement. Now it's being deployed to serve Mandelson himself.
There's a broader pattern here that goes beyond one UK politician. The Epstein revelations have been remarkable not just for what they've revealed about who associated with him, but for how consistently the response from the powerful has been to deflect, deny, and deploy every available mechanism to avoid genuine accountability. Some have used their media platforms to try to reshape the narrative. Some have simply refused to comment.
Mandelson is trying to use the press regulatory system itself.
It's worth noting that The National chose to publish the "confidential - strictly not for publication" memo anyway, explicitly citing the public interest. Good for them. Because if there's one thing that absolutely serves the public interest, it's shining a light on attempts by the powerful to use the systems meant to protect the vulnerable as shields for their own accountability.
Mandelson's representatives say he "does not wish to speak to the media at this time." That's his right to request—but no media should have to agree to his terms. Weaponizing press regulation to create a cone of silence around questions of obvious public interest is something else entirely. It's elite impunity dressed up in the language of press ethics.
At first, the idea of selling a flat can seem straightforward. You catalogue it, locate a buyer and anticipate a quick turnaround. Flat sales can lag behind housing sales, and the reasons aren't always clear. Many delays stem from things buyers and sellers hadn't considered, or don't think about until the process is already underway. Knowing these things early can help you avoid frustration and make the best choices when time is of the essence.
Legal and Paperwork Issues That Slow Things DownOne of the biggest foot-draggers is related to paperwork associated with leasehold ownership. Unlike houses, most flats demand extra paperwork before a sale can proceed.
The management packs are a perfect example. The freeholder or managing agent supplies them and they contain information such as service charges, building insurance and planned works. They are indispensable for the buyer's solicitor, but are sometimes requested late and can take weeks to arrive. Some managing agents also levy hefty fees, which can add to delays while costs are negotiated.
Ground rent clauses may also prove problematic. Some terms could raise concerns for mortgage lenders, particularly if the ground rent balloons over time. If picked up by legal checks, buyers might pause or even walk away entirely.
Then there are building safety forms. Dozens of flat sales now hinge on new safety regulations to confirm fire safety and the presence of cladding. If the correct form is not provided on time or is incomplete, solicitors may decline to continue until it is corrected.
Practical and Timing Challenges Sellers Often MissBut beyond paperwork, timing is a significant factor in how quickly a flat sale closes. Property chains also play a part. If your buyer's buyer has a property to sell and there's yet another buyer involved, it can drag on significantly longer. Flats are often in long chains, meaning that if one link fails, the entire row collapses.
Delaying for this interval can be pretty frustrating, especially when there is a personal or financial deadline. Job changes, relationship breakups, or repeated costs, such as service charges, can make waiting unbearable. In such a scenario, some sellers seek to minimise uncertainty and think "I'd better look to sell my flat fast", prioritising speed over receiving the best price for the property. Finding a cash buyer can help them proceed without relying on prolonged chains or legal processes.
Preparation is another area sellers often overlook. Missing documents, murky histories of service charges, or unresolved disputes with managing agents can all slow the process once a buyer has been identified. Buyers are wary, and anything that appears questionable can prompt additional questions or renegotiation.
Flat sales are often delayed for a mix of legal and practical reasons. The management packs, the terms of the ground rent, and the forms for building safety and property chains all play a part but are easy to overlook initially. Sellers who know about these issues in advance can prepare, prevent unnecessary delays, and take the best course of action for their circumstances. A less bumpy experience begins with understanding where problems typically arise and addressing them before your sale is impacted.
The Department for Work and Pensions' (DWP) own figures show that the number of Work Capability Assessments (WCA) will be higher than ever in 2031. This is despite the DWP and it's chief Pat McFadden insisting the WCA will be abolished by then
How exactly does the DWP plan to save money?Benefits and Work sent the Treasury and DWP a Freedom of Information (FOI) request in December. They wanted a breakdown of the savings vaguely alluded to in the autumn budget.
Back in November, Reeves had announced that the DWP would: Improve operations by increasing face-to-face assessments, increasing WCA reassessment capability, and PIP award review changes, starting from April 2026.
She then said the DWP's annual total savings would be 1.9 billion, but there was, of course, no breakdown of this in the autumn budget document.
Benefits and Work asked the DWP to:
Government not keen to be transparent, shockerPlease give a detailed breakdown of how the £1.9 billion is to be saved, including:
a) Any additional assessment costs created by increasing the number of WCA reassessments
b) Any savings resulting from a reduction in the number of claimants found to no longer have LCWRA due to the increased number of WCA reassessments
c) Any savings in assessment costs caused by extending the time between PIP reviews
d) Any additional assessment costs caused by increasing the proportion of PIP face-to-face assessments
e) Any savings in PIP costs caused by increasing the proportion of PIP face-to-face assessments, due to the lower success rate for PIP applicants when assessed face-to-face rather than remotely.
The government was, naturally, hesitant to give details about a figure they'd probably pulled out of their arses. The Treasury ridiculously told Benefits and Work it would cost too much to answer their request.
The DWP refused to answer repeated requests from both the Liberal Democrats and Disability News Service on where the savings would come from.
However, in December the DWP put out a press release about increasing face-to-face assessments. It said PIP face-to-face assessments would increase from 6% to 30% and WCAs would increase from 13% to 30%.
At first glance, it's not clear how more work would mean savings. But this feels like a deliberate attempt to insinuate that so many people are getting benefits because it's easier to "fake" over the phone.
Finally, some clarity — well….Finally, this week, after more pressure from Benefits and Work, the DWP replied to their FOI:
The £1.9bn comprises the following figures shown in Table 1:
This £1.9bn figure does not include any additional assessment costs. This is because the reduced number of assessments for PIP releases resource to increase WCA reassessments and face-to-face assessments, and there is no assumed net increase in the number of health care professionals employed by DWP's contracted providers as a result of these policies.
Benefits and Work have estimated that a huge proportion of the savings will come from reducing admin costs.
57% of savings over the next five years (£1.12 billion) will come from extending the amount of time between PIP reassessments, from 3 years to 5. 31% (£609 million) of the savings will be from increasing WCA assessments. Some of this saving will come from the health element of Universal Credit moving to PIP, meaning, in theory, fewer assessors are needed. But it's also probably assuming many will get the new lower rate.
8% (£164 million) of the savings will come from face-to-face PIP assessments increasing, and just 3% (£58 million) will come from more face-to-face WCA assessments.
So, despite the DWP saying otherwise, it's actually a very small amount that will come from kicking vulnerable people off benefits.
But the WCA is supposed to be gone?What's even weirder here, however, is that the WCA will still be taking place at all post 2030. This is because in the Pathway's to Work Green Paper, the DWP planned to have it abolished by 2029. This is because the paper set out that the UC health element would be moved over to PIP and claimants would need to score so many points on the daily living component.
However, this paper was also reliant on PIP cuts going through and PIP eligibility changing so that you had to score at least 4 points in one activity to get the daily living element. But then PIP had to be completely written out of the cuts after huge campaign efforts saw Labour MPs rebel. So until the Timms Review concludes, both claimants and the DWP haven't got a fucking clue what's happening there.
Despite this, DWP chief Pat McFadden still hasn't definitively said the WCA won't be abolished, just that it'll be delayed.
The Work and Pensions Committee asked him in December if he still intended to abolish the WCA. His response was, of course, vague as fuck:
DWP — just more proof that the Timms Review is a shamDue to its link with the PIP assessment, WCA abolition will not happen until after the Timms Review into the PIP assessment has concluded and any recommendations have been made. In the meantime, work is continuing to determine the detail of how this reformed system would work and discussions are also ongoing with the Scottish Government regarding the interactions between the devolved and reserved systems. We will outline further details on the reformed system, and the timing of WCA abolition, in due course.
As Benefits and Work point out, it could be that McFadden knows exactly what will happen with the WCA, but to say otherwise would let slip what we already know. That the Timms review and any notions of helping disabled claimants is just smoke and mirrors when they're already working so hard to turn the public against us. At the end of the day the department give a fuck whether disabled people live or die.
Featured image via the Canary
Less than a week after Valve admitted that the current shortage (and growing prices) of RAM were affecting its hardware plans, the Steam Deck is completely sold out. The Steam Deck has gone in and out of stock in the past, but as Kotaku notes, the timing does raise the question whether Valve's RAM issues could also be impacting its Linux handheld.
The 256GB Steam Deck LCD, and both the 512GB and 1TB models of the Steam Deck OLED, are completely sold out on Steam. Valve announced that it was discontinuing the LCD versions of its handheld and selling through its remaining inventory in December 2025, so the fact that the 256GB Steam Deck model is currently sold out isn't surprising. That both OLED versions are also unavailable at the same time, though, is a bit more unusual.
Engadget has contacted Valve for more information about the availability of the Steam Deck. We'll update this article if we hear back.
When Valve announced the Steam Machine, Steam Controller and Steam Frame, the company notably left pricing and availability off the table, presumably because tariffs and access to RAM were leaving those details in flux. The company's announcement last week that the memory and storage shortage had pushed back its plans and would likely impact prices more or less confirmed that. At no point did Valve mention that the Steam Deck would be similarly affected, but maybe it should have.
The rising cost of RAM has already forced other PC makers to adjust the pricing of their computers. Framework announced in January that it was raising the price of its Framework Desktop by as much as $460. Some analysts assume that the memory shortage driven by the AI industry could lead to higher prices and even an economic downturn in the wider PC industry. Ideally, the Steam Deck being out of stock is a temporary issue rather than a sign that Valve is doing something drastic. If things continue as they are, however, changes to the Steam Deck likely won't be off the table.
This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/pc/the-great-ramaggedon-of-2026-might-have-just-claimed-the-steam-deck-211958306.html?src=rss
They know where you've been and they're going to share it. A security researcher has identified 287 Chrome extensions that allegedly exfiltrate browsing history data for an estimated 37.4 million installations.…
In life, some things are always true. One such truth is that wherever there is instability, pain and suffering in the world, former Navy SEAL and mercenary kingpin Erik Prince will be there trying to make a profit out of it. Like a fly on an open wound…
The Trump loyalist is now operating in the Democratic Republic of Congo. And he's got a drone armada and a bunch of Israeli contractors with him. Prince signed a deal with Congo in 2025 to support the government in a conflict with Rwanda-backed rebels.
Haaretz reported on 11 February:
Blackwater founder Erik Prince deployed a private security force to operate drones and help the Democratic Republic of Congo's army secure the strategic city of Uvira against Rwanda-backed rebels
His entourage includes:
a private security force trained by Israelis to operate drones and help the Democratic Republic of Congo's army secure the strategic city of Uvira
But Prince, descendant of a line of US industrialists, is a busy man if nothing else…
Erik Prince — real-life Bond villainPrince made a name in Iraq, where his now-defunct firm Blackwater is famous for the massacring of civilians. The early stages of that unpopular US occupation saw a boom in private military firms being used by the US and others, as well as by foreign oil firms. Trump eventually pardoned those convicted for the killings. Prince raked in millions anyway.
Blackwater was re-branded as Xe in 2009, then Academi in 2011. What hasn't changed is that Prince has been making money out of war and chaos for decades.
Prince has interests in Ukrainian drones, Israeli occupation and the US dirty war with Venezuela. Prince sought to securitise Europe's frontier against desperate refugees. He has been described as a real-life Bond villain and a hardcore Trump man from the start:
Erik Prince has always been politically connected to Maga, the Maga movement, and that's going back to 2015.
He is also reported to be:
a central figure among a web of other contractors trying to sell Trump advisers on a $25bn deal to privatize the mass deportations of 12 million migrants.
Prince also ran private military contractors to Haiti and is implicated in illegal arms deals in Libya. There doesn't seem to be an authoritarian regime or shadowy outfit he won't roll with: the UAE, Ecuador, China, Russia, the CIA… and the list goes on.
Now we know what sort of man this is, back to Congo.
Diamonds in AfricaKinshasa hired the mercenaries
to help secure and improve tax revenue collection from Congo's vast mineral reserves.
Sources in the country told the press:
Prince's contractors operated in coordination with Israeli advisers who were involved in training two Congolese special forces battalions on day and night operations, according to a fifth source briefed on the operation.
They added the Israeli mandate is "training only":
The AFC/M23 rebels briefly seized the city on the border with Burundi in December in a major blow to ongoing US- and Qatar-backed peace negotiations. They withdrew after Washington threatened to retaliate
And Hareetz said:
The US has offered Congo support brokering an end to the conflict in return for access to the nation's critical mineral resources.
Trump's art of the deal at work again…
Now Prince's mercenaries are on the ground. Neither his nor the Congolese government's spokespeople offered any comment. Prince is again confirming his role as colonialist grim reaper figure. In truth, he probably relishes that persona. It follows that he and Trump are natural bedfellows. Like the US president, Prince embodies the spirit of American capitalism and its role across the world. The trail of bodies his operations have left behind seems to confirm this.
Featured image via the Canary
By Joe Glenton
