Robert Jenrick has blamed the Tories for extortionate house prices, despite being a former Tory Housing Secretary who only recently defected to Reform.

The two old parties made housing unaffordable.

Reform is now the home for aspirational young people.

Simon has the real world experience to break the cycle of broken promises. https://t.co/bETQLedo3k

— Robert Jenrick (@RobertJenrick) February 9, 2026

Jenrick served as Housing Secretary for over two years during the previous Conservative government. And his track record as a Tory minister cannot be ignored.

During that time, he fast-tracked a £1bn development for a porn baron.

Oh dear Bobbie Boy.

You were a literal housing minister for two years under the Tories. You remember them?

One of the 'two old parties'.

Remember? You fast tracked a £1 Billion development for a porn baron. https://t.co/kDI1LltnKm

— Don McGowan (@donmcgowan) February 9, 2026

He also came under fire over the allocation of the £3.6bn Towns Fund. The Public Accounts Committee ruled that this was "not impartial". The fund was set up to help financially challenged towns, but a panel found it was heavily skewed towards Tory constituencies. Jenrick's own received £25m in funding.

Useless bastard who failed miserably in a disgraceful government, switched parties and says 'vote for me' because he fucked up so badly in his previous job.

Utter cunt. He thinks we're fucking stupid. https://t.co/pkFkqmmDPT

— Lord Monsieur Prepuce

This photograph shows undated pictures provided by the U.S. Department of Justice on Jan. 30, 2026 as part of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Photo: Photo by Martin Bureau/AFP via Getty Images

With each successive trove of documents from the Epstein files the Department of Justice releases, we're treated to rare insight into how our ruling class behaves in private, and how connected many of them were to the late sex trafficker. 

The list of elites who maintained close relationships with Epstein is long and includes prominent politicians, media figures, academics, and business leaders. In contrast, the list of people who have faced any meaningful consequences, at least in the United States, is so far quite short. Recently, Brad Karp, a top Democratic Party fundraising "bundler," was removed as chair of the white-shoe law firm Paul Weiss after his extensive ties to Epstein were revealed. Peter Attia, the celebrity doctor and a new hire at Bari Weiss' CBS News, resigned from a protein bar company after emails showed him making dirty jokes with Epstein. The economist Larry Summers was deemed toxic after a previous DOJ disclosure, and despite his intention to continue teaching, was put on leave by Harvard and unceremoniously dropped by numerous institutions. So far, that's about the extent of it.

To be very explicit, this lack of serious consequences is a choice that powerful people in the United States are making. Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom, Prince Andrew is prince no more, reduced to merely Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor after King Charles removed all of his remaining royal titles; the former CEO of Barclays has been barred from the finance industry; the British ambassador to the United States, Peter Mandelson, has been forced out; Morgan McSweeney, Prime Minister Keir Starmer's chief of staff and a Mandelson protege, was forced to resign under pressure; and Starmer risks losing his post over the Mandelson appointment. In Slovakia, the national security adviser to the prime minister has resigned. Accountability, if you care to enforce it, is in fact possible.

But on this side of the pond, elites have moved to protect powerful people with Epstein connections (themselves included). Donald Trump is the most obvious example; for any other president, the relationship between the two men would have been a fast track to impeachment. The documents also reveal how many powerful people maintained relationships with Epstein years after he was convicted of soliciting a minor for prostitution in 2008: Among them are former presidential adviser and current podcast bro Steve Bannon, Trump's Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Tesla et al. CEO and "MechaHitler" progenitor Elon Musk, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, Palantir co-founder Peter Thiel, and Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates. Extensive redactions to the documents by the Justice Department have slow-walked matters even further, but on Tuesday, Rep. Ro Khanna took aim by reading off the names of "six wealthy, powerful men that the DOJ hid for no apparent reason" on the floor of Congress.

If there's to be any measure of accountability, the powerful people who palled around with Epstein, asked his advice, or otherwise provided cover for him need to be cast out of polite society forever.

To make matters worse, many figures who appear in the files have reacted to the ongoing Epstein disclosures in ways that merit aggressive eyebrow raising. After the threat of being held in contempt of Congress, former President Bill Clinton, who for years had a close relationship with Epstein, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have finally, under pressure, agreed to testify before the House Oversight Committee. The Clintons resisted subpoenas, even calling them "invalid and legally unenforceable," until a bipartisan majority of the House Oversight Committee voted to move the measure to hold them in contempt to the full House. Before that inflection point, they apparently expected Democrats to close ranks around them, as they always have in the past. Republican maneuvering aside, the presumption that noncompliance with a legitimate subpoena from Congress is somehow permissible, or even noble, reflects the air of impunity that ruling elites have toward basic functions of the rule of law.

But make no mistake: If there's to be any measure of real accountability, the powerful people who palled around with Epstein, asked his advice, or otherwise provided cover for him need to be cast out of polite society forever.

Beyond being packed with salacious gossip and more than enough material for months more of investigative journalism, the newly released documents are striking in how they reveal elites' widespread casual disdain for us commoners. Perhaps more than anything, the Epstein files are jarring for how transparently they communicate that members of our elite believe that norms, consequences, and even laws don't apply to them. There seems to be no end to the number of emails from powerful people seeking out Epstein's advice for how to handle controversies ranging from sexual assault allegations to formal human resources investigations to media scrutiny. (Former Arizona State University professor Lawrence Krauss is probably the clearest example; as Grace Panetta wrote for The 19th, "Krauss turned to Epstein for public relations advice and strategy, sent him possible cross-examination questions for his accusers, forwarded an article on the dos and don'ts for apologizing, and fielded Epstein's edits and feedback on draft statements.") 

Not to put too fine a point on it, but it should absolutely be disqualifying to seek image management tips from someone like Epstein, particularly years after they pleaded guilty to soliciting sex from a minor. If you're running to a convicted child sex trafficker to plan your PR strategy, if you're chummily asking for his insights and making social plans, or if you are seeking advice on how to use professional leverage to induce a subordinate to have sex with you, then you are probably someone we should never hear from again.

It is worth being quite clear here: This does not mean everyone who makes any appearance at all in the files needs to be excised from public life. For instance, the political commentators Megan McArdle, Josh Barro, Ben Dreyfuss, and Ross Douthat recently recorded a podcast episode titled "We're All in the Epstein Files," which notes that they all are there because of tweets that a third party shared with Epstein, mostly via a newsletter sent out by Gregory Brown. That sort of thing is not the point. In order to actually clean house, we need to be clear where the dirt is. 

But there are many cases where influential figures were cavorting with Epstein for years, maintaining close relationships with a prominent sex trafficker, and often being creepy in the correspondence itself. In many more, the emails became damning in context. 

For example, the MIT Media Lab, an initiative heavily backed by billionaire Hoffman, accepted Epstein's donations for years after his conviction, including soliciting donations in 2016. Importantly, MIT Media Lab staff internally flagged Epstein's criminal history in 2013 — even sending a helpful link to his Wikipedia page — when Media Lab director Joichi Ito raised him as a prospective funder, according to a report commissioned by the university. Ito ignored those concerns, accepted Epstein's money, and remained in touch until well into 2019, including exchanging text messages in May, just three months before Epstein's death.

The new documents also show Ito attempted to arrange a meeting with himself, Hoffman, and Epstein during a 2016 conference, while promising to "drag interesting [p]eople over" from the conference to a nearby house. That awkwardness is compounded by the fact that the MIT Media Lab gave Epstein an appreciation gift even later in 2017. Ito, for his part, did resign from MIT, as well as from the boards of multiple foundations in 2019.

Or take prominent evolutionary biologist Robert Trivers, who continued to solicit funding from Epstein until at least 2017, based on a check from January and a thank you note from August of that year. Trivers, along with Ito, shows how Epstein was still influential in shaping our public discourse long after he became a publicly known sex offender. In a February 2017 email, Trivers even passed along a "small joke" about his association with Epstein being described as a "folly" and he a "fool" for continuing the relationship (an allusion to Trivers' book The Folly of Fools). Trivers also credited Epstein with coming up with the idea to branch out in order to land speaking gigs, which resulted in a speaking engagement in London.

The Epstein saga has been unfolding against the backdrop of eroding trust in institutions and elites. What it has taught the public so far is that elites were undeserving of our implicit trust in the first place and, more broadly, that their shared interests are only with one another. If we want to move back toward a healthy public sphere where people are able to believe in the system and their ability to shape it, we need to reform it to be worthy of that trust. That will require never again letting people lacking any concept of basic human decency set the terms of our public discourse, dictate our moral frameworks, wield the powers of our government, or serve as our leaders. We need to cast out the creeps — permanently.

The post Americans Want Accountability With the Epstein Files. Elites Couldn't Care Less appeared first on The Intercept.

Someday

Microsoft wants you to know that it has found a new way of saving power at its datacenters using high-temperature superconducting (HTS) power delivery systems. And good news: it'll be possible ... someday.…

Academics look at problematic algorithm to inform regulatory discussion

A picture is worth a thousand words or, perhaps, a hundred thousand dollars in extra salary. Academics claim that personality traits inferred using AI photo analysis can predict how depicted individuals will fare in the labor market.…

Nvidia, Qualcomm, and Altera among the first to trial EDA giant's AI chip design agent

The idea of machines that can build even better machines sounds like sci-fi, but the concept is becoming a reality as companies like Cadence tap into generative AI to design and validate next-gen processors that also use AI.…

Meta has been going all in on AI, whether people want it or not, and now it's bringing more features in that vein to Facebook. The network's latest move is to let people use Meta AI to animate their profile photos. Because what better way to express your individuality than to use a pre-canned AI-generated animation on your own face?

Meta AI is also coming for your Facebook Stories and Memories. The network's Restyle lets you use gen-AI to change up the aesthetic of your posts. You can once again use pre-canned stylings or give the AI assistant your own prompt.

In the company's own words, the new tools that will create "share-worthy moments that spark meaningful interactions and conversations with friends." I guess meaning is in the eye of the beholder. If you're desperate to behold even more AI slop, Meta recently said its Vibes feed of exactly that content will be getting a standalone app.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/facebook-is-offering-meta-ai-powered-animations-for-profile-photos-201022506.html?src=rss

We live in a stupidly polarizing world where nuance is apparently not allowed. Everyone wants you to be for or against something—and nowhere is this more exhausting than with AI. There are those who insist that it's all bad and there is nothing of value in it. And there are those who think it's all powerful, the greatest thing ever, and will replace basically every job with AI bots who can work better and faster.

I think both are wrong, but it's important to understand why.

So let me lay out how I actually think about it. When it's used properly, as a tool to assist a human being in accomplishing a goal, it can be incredibly powerful and valuable. When it's used in a way where the human's input and thinking are replaced, it tends to do very badly.

And that difference matters.

I think back to a post from Cory Doctorow a couple months ago where he tried to make the same point using a different kind of analogy: centaurs and reverse-centaurs.

Start with what a reverse centaur is. In automation theory, a "centaur" is a person who is assisted by a machine. You're a human head being carried around on a tireless robot body. Driving a car makes you a centaur, and so does using autocomplete.

And obviously, a reverse centaur is a machine head on a human body, a person who is serving as a squishy meat appendage for an uncaring machine.

Like an Amazon delivery driver, who sits in a cabin surrounded by AI cameras, that monitor the driver's eyes and take points off if the driver looks in a proscribed direction, and monitors the driver's mouth because singing isn't allowed on the job, and rats the driver out to the boss if they don't make quota.

The driver is in that van because the van can't drive itself and can't get a parcel from the curb to your porch. The driver is a peripheral for a van, and the van drives the driver, at superhuman speed, demanding superhuman endurance. But the driver is human, so the van doesn't just use the driver. The van uses the driver up.

Obviously, it's nice to be a centaur, and it's horrible to be a reverse centaur.

As Doctorow notes in his piece, some of the companies embracing AI tech are doing so with the goal of building reverse-centaurs. Those are the ones that people are, quite understandably, uncomfortable with and should be mocked. But the reality is, also, it seems quite likely those efforts will fail.

And they'll fail not just because they're dehumanizing—though they are—but because the output is garbage. Hallucinations, slop, confidently wrong answers: that's what happens when nobody with actual knowledge is checking whether any of it makes sense. When AI works well, it's because a human is providing the knowledge and the creativity.

The reverse-centaur doesn't just burn out the human. It produces worse work, because it assumes that the AI can provide the knowledge or the creativity. It can't. That requires a human. The power of AI tools is in enabling a human to take their own knowledge, and their own creativity and enhance it, to do more with it, based on what the person actually wants.

To me it's a simple question of "what's the tool?" Is it the AI, used thoughtfully by a human to do more than they otherwise could have? If so, that's a good and potentially positive use of AI. It's the centaur in Doctorow's analogy.

Or is the human the tool? Is it a "reverse centaur"? I think nearly all of those are destined to fail.

This is why I tend not to get particularly worked up by those who claim that AI is going to destroy jobs and wipe out the workforce, who will be replaced by bots. It just… doesn't work that way.

At the same time, I find it ridiculous to see people still claiming that the technology itself is no good and does nothing of value. That's just empirically false. Plenty of people—including myself—get tremendous use out of the technology. I am using it regularly in all different ways. It's been two years since I wrote about how I used it to help as a first pass editor.

The tech has gotten dramatically better since then, but the key insight to me is what it takes to make it useful: context is everything. My AI editor doesn't just get my draft writeup and give me advice based on that and its training—it also has a sampling of the best Techdirt articles, a custom style guide with details about how I write, a deeply customized system prompt (the part of AI tools that are often hidden from public view) and a deeply customized starting prompt. It also often includes the source articles I'm writing about. With all that context, it's an astoundingly good editor. Sometimes it points out weak arguments I missed entirely. Sometimes it has nothing to say.

(As an aside, in this article, it suggested I went on way too long explaining all the context I give it to give me better suggestions, and thus I shortened it to just the paragraph above this one).

It's not always right. Its suggestions are not always good. But that's okay, because I'm not outsourcing my brain to it. It's a tool. And way more often than not, it pushes me to be a better writer.

This is why I get frustrated every time people point out a single AI fail or hallucination without context.

The problem only comes in when people outsource their brains. When they become reverse centaurs. When they are the tool instead of using AI as the tool. That's when hallucinations or bad info matter.

But if the human is in control, if they're using their own brain, if they're evaluating what the tool is suggesting or recommending and making the final decision, then it can be used wisely and can be incredibly helpful.

And this gets at something most people miss entirely: when they think about AI, they're still imagining a chatbot. They think every AI tool is ChatGPT. A thing you talk to. A thing that generates text or images for you to copy-paste somewhere else.

That's increasingly not where the action is. The more powerful shift is toward agentic AI—tools that don't just generate content, but actually do things. They write code and run it. They browse the web and synthesize what they find. They execute multi-step tasks with minimal hand-holding. This is a fundamentally different model than "ask a chatbot a question and get an answer."

I've been using Claude Code recently, and this distinction matters. It's an agent that can plan, execute, and iterate on actual software projects, rather than just a tool talking to me about what to do. But, again, that doesn't mean I just outsource my brain to it.

I often put Claude Code into plan mode, where it tries to work out a plan, but then I spend quite a lot of time exploring why it was making certain decisions, and asking it to explore the pros and cons of those decisions, and even to provide me with alternative sources to understand the trade-offs of some of the decisions it is recommending. That back and forth has been both educational for me, but also makes me have a better understanding and be comfortable with the eventual projects I use Claude Code to build.

I am using it as a tool, and part of that is making sure I understand what it's doing. I am not outsourcing my brain to it. I am using it, carefully, to do things that I simply could not have done before.

And that's powerful and valuable.

Yes, there are so many bad uses of AI tools. And yes, there is a concerted, industrial-scale effort, to convince the public they need to use AI in ways that they probably shouldn't, or in ways that is actively harmful. And yes, there are real questions about what it costs to train and run the foundation models. And we should discuss those and call those out for what they are.

But the people who insist the tools are useless and provide nothing of value, that's just wrong. Similarly, anyone who thinks the tech is going to go away are entirely wrong. There likely is a funding bubble. And some companies will absolutely suffer as it deflates. But it won't make the tech go away.

When used properly, it's just too useful.

As Cory notes in his centaur piece, AI can absolutely help you do your job, but the industry's entire focus is on convincing people it can replace your job. That's the con. The tech doesn't replace people. But it can make them dramatically more capable—if they stay in the driver's seat.

The key to understanding the good and the bad of the AI hype is understanding that distinction. Cory explains this in reference to AI coding:

Think of AI software generation: there are plenty of coders who love using AI, and almost without exception, they are senior, experienced coders, who get to decide how they will use these tools. For example, you might ask the AI to generate a set of CSS files to faithfully render a web-page across multiple versions of multiple browsers. This is a notoriously fiddly thing to do, and it's pretty easy to verify if the code works - just eyeball it in a bunch of browsers. Or maybe the coder has a single data file they need to import and they don't want to write a whole utility to convert it.

Tasks like these can genuinely make coders more efficient and give them more time to do the fun part of coding, namely, solving really gnarly, abstract puzzles. But when you listen to business leaders talk about their AI plans for coders, it's clear they're not looking to make some centaurs.

They want to fire a lot of tech workers - they've fired 500,000 over the past three years - and make the rest pick up their work with coding, which is only possible if you let the AI do all the gnarly, creative problem solving, and then you do the most boring, soul-crushing part of the job: reviewing the AIs' code.

Criticize the hype. Mock the replace-your-workforce promises. Call out the slop factories and the gray goo doomsaying. But don't mistake the bad uses for the technology itself. When a human stays in control—thinking, evaluating, deciding—it's a genuinely powerful tool. The important question is just whether you're using it, or it's using you.

Instantly become a color expert with the Nix Mini 3 Color Sensor. This portable device puts all paint fan decks in your pocket, offering access to over 200,000 brand-name paint colors and essential color codes like RGB, HEX, and CMYK. Perfect for designers, contractors, and homeowners. The Mini 3 features Bluetooth connectivity, Debris and splash resistance, and free access to the Nix Toolkit app for precise and convenient color matching. This newest version improves accuracy with 3x enhanced resolution over the Mini 2 and significant improvements to battery life and Bluetooth connectivity. The Nix Mini 3 ensures reliable color management for any project. Additionally, it matches premium libraries like Pantone, RAL, and NCS with monthly or annual subscription options. It's on sale for $69.97 for a limited time.

Note: The Techdirt Deals Store is powered and curated by StackCommerce. A portion of all sales from Techdirt Deals helps support Techdirt. The products featured do not reflect endorsements by our editorial team.

Paris-headquartered Naboo has raised a $70m in Series B as it accelerates its ambition to become the operating layer for how large companies plan, book, and control corporate events. The round is led by Lightspeed Venture Partners, the same investor that backed Mistral AI in 2023, and lands just a year after Naboo closed a €20m Series A. Naboo positions itself as an AI-powered procurement platform for corporate events, covering everything from venue booking and travel to supplier coordination and budget control. Founded in 2022, Naboo built its name on simplifying how companies organise and run corporate events,  from booking…

This story continues at The Next Web

Databricks is having one of those years that most enterprise software companies would quietly envy. The data and AI platform says it has reached a $5.4bn annual revenue run rate, growing 65% year over year, at a time when growth across the sector has cooled noticeably. For a private company, that pace is rare. And it helps explain why investors have continued to pour money into Databricks, even as funding has become more selective. The company says it has now raised more than $7bn in total capital, including recent equity funding that values the business at $134bn, alongside a large…

This story continues at The Next Web

You have likely heard about the masked agents of ICE mucking around in Minnesota for the past few months, resulting in numerous violent incidents and deaths. Itch.io is hosting a bundle to help raise money for the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota, which was organized by charity creator Jes Wade.

The No ICE in Minnesota bundle includes nearly 1,300 video games and tabletop games and costs just $10, though those with deep pockets can certainly donate more than that. It has a goal of $100,000, which it certainly is on pace to meet.

There are some nifty titles here, particularly for those interested in indie puzzle games and life sims. The standout is likely the stellar puzzler Baba Is You, which won the Game Designers Award at the Tokyo Games Show in 2020. This is a game that has to be played to be understood, as players are given the opportunity to change the rules to find novel solutions to complex puzzles. It's very good.

The bundle includes the life simulation game Calico, which involves players running a cat cafe on a magical island. The art style is gorgeous and the gameplay is relaxing. Also, calico cats are awesome.

Other titles include the bee-collecting sim Apico, the musical sci-fi adventure Periphery Synthetic and the space-based roguelike Hyperspace Dogfights. Scroll through the list to see if anything else strikes your interest, but mark out some time on the calendar first. Scrolling through nearly 1,300 games can take a while.

The Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota is a nonprofit that provides free representation to low-income immigrants and refugees. The organization also provides support for those who have witnessed violent attacks and advocates for public policies which "respect the universal human rights of immigrants."

I live in Minneapolis. ICE is still here in full force, despite the media moving on to shinier objects. We really do need all the help we can get. The long-term presence of these masked, armed agents is really starting to destroy the local economy and many people are quite literally trapped indoors. To say morale is low would be an understatement. Schools are still being raided and people are still being brutally beaten. American citizens are still being arrested for dubious reasons. This is all happening after the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

That's why these fundraising bundles on Itch have become so important. They really do shine a light on important topics. This is organizer Jes Wade's second ICE-related bundle, with a former focusing on California relief efforts. There have also been bundles to help raise money for the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and Community Bail Fund and to raise cash for charities working in Ukraine.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/this-itchio-bundle-to-help-minnesota-includes-over-1200-games-and-costs-just-10-190643987.html?src=rss

Former cryptocurrency poster boy Sam Bankman-Fried is trying to get another chance in court. He has filed a request that for a new trial on claims that new witness testimony could alter the case made against him by prosecutors, according to Bloomberg. His odds for getting the re-trial, where he'd be representing himself, seem pretty slim. This is a separate motion from a formal appeal of his previous conviction.

Bankman-Fried is one of many cryptocurrency leaders who have since been prosecuted for fraud. After being jailed for witness tampering, he was found guilty of seven charges of fraud and conspiracy in 2023. Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison for his actions as CEO and co-founder of crypto exchange FTX.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/sam-bankman-fried-wants-a-re-trial-for-fraud-charges-185910093.html?src=rss

I don't understand sycophancy. Never have. I don't know what it gets you in the long run other than a reputation for subservience. That's worth nearly nothing in the open market. The only people who will hire you are people most people would never want to work for.

And yet, that is pretty much the entirety of the GOP under Trump: a massive collection of doormats the current president won't even remember stepping on moments later. Sucking up to a goldfish brain like Trump makes you a fool, rather than the savvy pol you imagine yourself to be.

Welcome to the dom side of the sub/dom equation, Senator Marsha Blackburn. While she's most famous here for trying to turn the internet into whatever the current iteration of the GOP wishes it to be (at least here at Techdirt), she's stepped out of her comfort zone recently to publicly complain about a Supreme Court justice who attended an awards show where multiple people publicly criticized Trump's anti-migrant actions.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) called for an investigation Thursday into Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson for attending the Grammy Awards, where various artists criticized Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

[…]

"Americans deserve a Supreme Court that is impartial and above political influence," Blackburn wrote on social platform X. "When a Justice participates in such a highly politicized event, it raises ethical questions. We need an investigation into Justice Jackson's ability to remain impartial."

First things fucking last, Justice Jackson was not a presenter, nor was she a "participant" in any of the ICE criticism delivered by Grammy-nominated artists like Bad Bunny, Billie Eilish, and Justin Vernon. She was also not involved in any way with the production of the Grammy Awards ceremony, further removing her from anything that might be deemed "impartial."

But beyond any of that is the fact that Justice Jackson had a perfectly legitimate, non-political reason to be there:

Jackson was nominated in the Best Audio Book, Narration and Storytelling Recording category for her memoir "Lovely One." 

Jackson didn't win (she lost to the Dalai Lama which, if you're going to lose, is probably a loss you'll never complain about publicly) but she was nominated. That alone gave her a reason to be there. The anti-ICE content may have been personally enjoyable, but she wasn't there to soak up the stuff being said by others.

Not that it matters to the performative doormats currently employed as GOP politicians. Sen. Blackburn immediately started banging away on her keyboard and decided to take her disgruntled Grammy Awards forum comments to the next level by sending them off to Chief Justice John Roberts:

I write today regarding recent reporting about Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's attendance at the Grammy Awards in Los Angeles, California, on Sunday, February 1, and the ethical questions raised by her attendance at such a highly politicized event. For the following
reasons, I urge you to conduct a thorough investigation into Justice Jackson's attendance at this event and whether her presence at such an event complies with the obligation that a Supreme Court justice "act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary."

While it is by no means unheard of or unusual for a Supreme Court justice to attend a public function, very rarely—if ever—have justices of our nation's highest Court been present at an event at which attendees have amplified such far-left rhetoric. Many of the attendees wore lapel pins that read "ICE OUT," an anti-Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) adage. One Grammy winner that evening opened his acceptance speech by stating, "Before I say thanks to God, I'm going to say 'ICE out,'" which was received with thunderous applause by the crowd. Another award recipient that evening noted in her acceptance speech that "No one is illegal on stolen land," going on to say that "we need to keep fighting and speaking up and protesting . . . And f*** ICE, that's all I'm gonna say." These statements were just two of many polarized, highly charged anti-law enforcement sentiments from that evening. It is important to note that Justice Jackson was present in the audience throughout the event.

Wow. Harsh words from someone who couldn't be bothered to speak up while Justice Clarence Thomas received millions of dollars' worth of gifts from right-wing benefactors over the past two decades. She was oddly quiet when it was revealed Justice Thomas's wife was pushing election conspiracy theories. Truly an unexpected amount of yelling from someone who had nothing to say when Justice Alito's wife was flying pro-Trump flags at Alito's home.

Oh. Wait. Blackburn has something to say about both of those things in this letter to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:

Unlike these meritless claims against Justice Alito and Justice Thomas, there are serious questions regarding Justice Jackson's participation in such a brazenly political, anti-law enforcement event and her ability to remain an impartial member of the Supreme Court.

It was a Grammy Awards ceremony, not an anti-ICE protest. That people had negative things to say about ICE is completely expected, given how many people are opposed to how this administration is handling immigration enforcement. Blackburn absolutely knows she's comparing apples to precision-machined aftermarket car parts. But like everyone else in this despicable political party, she doesn't care and she knows it's going to cause at least a small percentage of the converted to pretend to be offended on her behalf.

I assume John Roberts knows this as well. Let's hope he'll just roll his eyes and go back to binge-watching the kind of television I assume he enjoys: the no-one-asked-for-this 2023 reboot of Night Court.

Republican Rep. Tony Gonzales from Texas went on Face the Nation on Sunday and said a lot of silly things, doing his best as a loyal Trump foot soldier to defend the indefensible, to make sense of the nonsensical, and to lie about all the rest.

However, I wanted to focus on one bit of the clip that I've watched over a dozen times, and still can't figure out what Rep. Gonzales meant. And I'm writing this in hopes that some DC or Texas reporter asks Gonzales to explain. Here's the clip:

Gonzales on Liam Ramos and his family: "They're not gonna qualify for asylum. So what do you do with all the people that go through the process and do not qualify for asylum? You deport them. I understand that 5-year-old and it breaks my heart. I also think, what about that 5-year-old US citizen?"

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-02-08T16:09:49.039Z

And here's the transcript from CBS. I'm including a bit more than is in the clip just to get the full context of what he's saying:

MARGARET BRENNAN: You have this facility, though, in your district, Dilley, and that is for family detentions. That's where little five-year-old Liam Ramos from Minnesota was held before a judge, that's the picture of him there, ordered him released. He was ordered released because his family has a pending asylum claim, a legal process. He had entered with U.S. government permission through a process that the Biden administration had deemed legal. The current administration does not. The CBPOne app. Liam's father gave an interview to Telemundo and you read the transcript, he's talking about this five-year-old. He's not okay. He's waking up at night crying. He's worried he's going to be taken again. It's psychological trauma, according to the father. And the administration is still trying to deport him. Do you understand why they are so focused on this five-year-old and his dad if they did come in through the front door with U.S. government permission? 

REP. GONZALES: Well, the front door was via an app that Biden knew exactly what he was doing, and he created this huge mess, and now President Trump is there to clean up.

MARGARET BRENNAN: -but he came in the front door, he wasn't-

REP. GONZALES: -through an app-

MARGARET BRENNAN: -across the border-

REP. GONZALES: -through an app that wasn't vetted. And bottom line is, he's likely- they're not going to qualify for asylum. So what do you do with all the people that go through the process and do not qualify for asylum? You deport them. I understand the five-year-old and it, you know, it breaks my heart. I have a five year old at home. I also think, what about that five-year-old U.S. citizen-

MARGARET BRENNAN: -You feel comfortable defending that? 

REP. GONZALES: I feel comfortable- we have to have a nation of laws. If we don't have a nation of laws-

MARGARET BRENNAN: -They were following the- the law that is- that is that's the rub, is that a new administration deemed the last administration's regulation not to be legal.

Again, there's a lot of nonsense in there, including Gonzales trying to pretend that Liam Ramos and his father had not entered the right way and following the laws of the US for those seeking to come here just because it was "through an app." That app was the legal process. They followed the law. They did it the right way. To magically make that out to be violating the law because the next administration no longer wants to support that path doesn't change the underlying fact that they were doing things the legal way.

But, again, let's leave that aside. I simply want to focus in on the question of what the fuck Gonzales meant when he said:

I understand the five-year-old and it, you know, it breaks my heart. I have a five year old at home. I also think, what about that five-year-old U.S. citizen-

What about them? Under what scenario, process, or idea is that hypothetical five-year-old US citizen harmed? I've been unable to think or a single possible scenario in which the US citizen five-year-old could be harmed by allowing Liam Ramos to go through the asylum process.

Perhaps Rep. Gonzales can enlighten us by completing his thought and explaining.

Seriously: what is the scenario here? Is pre-kindergarten a zero-sum game now? Does Liam Ramos's presence in a classroom somehow harm the US citizen in the next seat?

Brennan cut him off before he could finish the thought, and nobody followed up. So we don't know. But I'd really like someone in the DC or Texas press corps to ask him to complete that sentence. Because I can think of one very obvious way that five-year-old US citizens are being harmed right now—and it's not by Liam Ramos.

It's by watching their government kidnap their classmates.

Nicholas Grossman talked about how his own child is distraught because some of his classmates can no longer come to school for fear their parents may be kidnapped by ICE:

My first grader (a US citizen) came home from school crying because a friend from class (also a US citizen) hasn't been coming to school because his parents (one of whom is not a citizen) are afraid of ICE.Little kids don't have concepts of racism and xenophobia. That has to be taught. Or imposed.

— Nicholas Grossman (@nicholasgrossman.bsky.social) 2026-02-08T17:11:41.156Z

Indeed, the NY Times went and actually spoke with Liam Ramos' classmates, and they seem legitimately distraught that government agents kidnapped their friend and sent him halfway across the country to a dangerous concentration camp. The video on that page is absolutely heartbreaking. I don't see how anyone with a soul could possibly support or justify what is being done to Ramos. And to claim it's in the name of his US citizen classmates is even more obnoxious. Just a couple of the quotes from five year olds:

"You are scaring schools, people, and the world. You should be kind, helpful, and caring like normal police. Not dangerous, scary, and stealing people. I think you should make friends with the world."

"You, right now, you're making people really sad because you're just taking them away without them doing anything."

So, please, Rep. Gonazales, tell us what you were thinking. What about those five-year-olds? What about kidnapping their classmate makes them better off? What about any of this makes sense? They're not criminals. They followed the official legal process. They came in through "the front door" following the official process of the government at the time.

At no point have they done anything wrong.

So please, Rep. Gonzales: finish the thought. What about that five-year-old US citizen?

Because those five-year-old US citizens have already given their answer. They're not being harmed by Liam Ramos. They're being harmed by a government that just taught them their friends can disappear without warning.

That's "what about" them.

4.8 million UK broadband customers are missing out on £1.05bn of savings. This is the finding of analysis by comparison site Broadband Genie.

Broadband social tariffs are available to 5.3 million households. You can apply for one if you receive benefits or Universal Credit. Currently however, only a fraction (10%) of eligible households take up a social tariff.

A broadband social tariff costs less than a regular deal. Eligible customers can sign up for as little as £10 a month, significantly less over a 12-month period than a regular broadband plan. Broadband Genie's analysis estimates that eligible households would save £220 a year by switching to a social tariff.

What is a broadband social tariff?

A broadband social tariff is a broadband contract available to people on benefits and Universal Credit. You receive the same level of service as any other customer, but at a lower monthly cost. Eligible customers can switch to a social tariff at any time, won't incur any mid-contract price rises, and will not have to pay any setup or exit fees.

Purpl is a platform that finds discounts for disabled people and people living with long-term health conditions. Founder Georgina Colman highlighted the need to raise awareness of available support and the risks disabled consumers face if broadband becomes unaffordable:

This is a cost-of-living scandal hiding in plain sight. Millions of people on low incomes, including disabled people and those on Universal Credit, are overpaying for broadband simply because they don't know help exists.

Broadband is an essential service, and when households could be saving around £220 a year, the lack of awareness around social tariffs is letting people down. Providers need to do far more to actively tell customers what they're entitled to.

If broadband becomes unaffordable, disabled people don't just lose an internet connection, they lose a vital lifeline. For many, it's how they stay in touch with family, access support, manage their health and avoid isolation.

Disabled people are already more likely to experience loneliness, and pricing them out of broadband risks cutting them off from the world at a time when digital access is no longer optional.

How to sign up to a social tariff

• Do you qualify for a social tariff? Eligibility criteria vary between providers, but social tariffs are generally available to low-income households and those receiving benefits such as Universal Credit, Jobseeker's Allowance, Housing Benefit and Disability Living Allowance.
• Compare the tariffs available to you. If your current provider doesn't offer a social tariff, or you don't meet their criteria, you may wish to explore other options. If you explain your circumstances, your provider might let you leave your current contract without paying a penalty fee. Ofcom and trusted comparison sites publish information on the broadband tariffs available.
• Apply with the provider. To apply, you'll usually need to provide your contact details, National Insurance number, and proof of benefits. Once submitted, your provider will verify your eligibility with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). This process is typically quick and can sometimes be completed instantly.
• Switching and installation. If you're switching to a new provider, the One Touch Switch process means your new provider will handle all the stress of cancelling your existing contract and activating your new connection.
• I'm not eligible for a social tariff, or my application was rejected. If your application was rejected, double-check the eligibility criteria. If you can't get a broadband social tariff, 8.8 million bill payers are out of contract and are free to switch to something cheaper.

Alex Tofts from Broadband Genie said:

While take-up of broadband social tariffs is moving in the right direction, progress is slow. Only a fraction of eligible households are signed up to a social tariff.

We encourage anyone who thinks they're eligible for a social tariff to apply online or to contact their provider.

Awareness of these tariffs is a huge challenge, and providers need to play their part in making these products known to consumers. We found less than half of providers mention their social tariff on their website homepage. Offering social tariffs is voluntary for providers, and integrating them into a sustainable business model can be challenging. As a result, many providers invest little in promoting these packages.

If you're not eligible for a social tariff, 8.8 million bill payers are out of contract and can switch or renew their deal to lower their monthly outgoings.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

On social media, Green party leader Zack Polanski used a single word to tear apart Keir Starmer's 'I'm not resigning because I'm noble' shtick.

Polanski: "Mandates…"

Mandates…. https://t.co/GaJxZPf8xL pic.twitter.com/rNZeUQBubE— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) February 10, 2026

Indeed, Starmer was elected Labour leader on a mandate to carry out policies that party members support. But as soon as Starmer became Labour leader he gradually ditched every single one of those pledges — as Polanski highlighted.

Starmer tore up his mandate

On the pledge sheet sent to Labour members, Starmer promised raising income tax on the top 5% of earners. But in September 2023, the MP for Holborn and St Pancras walked that back, stating there would be no increase. It was a lie and Polanski is right to point this out.

He also pledged "support[ing] the abolition of tuition fees". Instead, Labour has raised tuition fees by £285 — another lie. This should reduce Starmer's mandate to tatters and he should be recalled for another election.

It's increasingly clear that words mean very little to Starmer. He also promised that he would "put the Green New Deal at the heart of everything we do".

And yet again, in February 2024, the Labour leader dropped a £28bn per year commitment to green energy. And in government, he's propping up fossil fuel firms with £22bn for carbon capture projects that don't even work.

Another pledge from Starmer was "no more illegal wars" and to:

"put human rights at the heart of foreign policy. Review all UK arms sales and make us a force for international peace and justice.

But the Labour government has provided diplomatic cover, arms, and logistic support for Israel's genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza. So that's another lie.

Starmer also claimed that "public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water."

But in similar form, he dropped plans to re-nationalise energy, mail and water. On rail, Labour is only nationalising the services, not the actual trains themselves. We will still rent those from rolling stock companies.

Another betrayed pledge was to "defend free movement as we leave the EU". But in November 2022, he reversed his position. He branded free movement a "red-line" that "won't come back under my government".

Under another, Starmer expressed his commitment to working:

shoulder to shoulder with trade unions to stand up for working people.

But then he demanded that his shadow cabinet do not join picket lines.

Resign

With these broken pledges in mind, the lies are stacking up, and Starmer should have resigned long ago.

In the UK, manifestos and commitments are treated as a joke — a means used by politicians to slide into power. Given the current state of UK politics, the public has grown attuned to these lies, but we must hold the elite to account and demand better — for all!

Featured image via the Canary 

By James Wright

The RMT is demanding a new law to safeguard transport workers in Scotland against a sharp rise in assaults. This comes ahead of a meeting with MSPs in Holyrood.

Action Against Assaults

The union will hold the 'Action Against Assaults' event at the Scottish Parliament on Wednesday 11 February at 1pm.

This event will bring together:

• The cabinet secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance MSP.
• MSPs from across the chamber.
• The British Transport Police.
• Rail and passenger ferry operators.
• Passenger organisations.

RMT general secretary Eddie Dempsey will set out the union's demand for the creation of a standalone offence of assaulting or abusing a public transport worker at work. This is similar to protections already in place for retail staff and emergency service workers.

The union is calling on all political parties contesting the Scottish Parliament elections in May 2026 to commit in their manifestos to introducing such legislation if elected.

Dempsey said:

No worker should go to their job fearing they will be assaulted, abused or threatened simply for doing their job.

But that is the daily reality for far too many public transport workers.

Seventy per cent of rail workers have faced violence in the past year and nearly half of our ferry members say the threat of violence is harming their mental health. That is a scandal which demands action.

We welcome the engagement from the Scottish Government to date and the meeting with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, but warm words must now become law.

Retail and emergency service workers rightly have specific legal protection and we want the same for public transport workers too.

As we approach the 2026 Scottish Parliament elections, every party must commit to creating a standalone offence of assaulting or abusing a public transport worker.

An RMT survey found that 70% of rail workers in Scotland experienced workplace violence in the past year. 80% believed violence had increased over the same period. The survey identified lone working as a major risk factor. Nearly 60 per cent of those who experienced assaults said they were working alone at the time.

The union also highlighted Scottish government research from 2023 which found that women and girls feel significantly safer on public transport when staff are present. This applies at stations, in ticket offices and onboard trains.

Nearly half of RMT passenger ferry members reported that the threat of violence at work has negatively affected their mental health.

In 2022, the Scottish government confirmed it was exploring the creation of a standalone offence.

Since then, a working group involving rail unions has been convened to consider enforcement measures. The cabinet secretary for Transport, Fiona Hyslop MSP, told parliament that stronger legal protections were under consideration and that the government was taking the matter "extremely seriously".

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

The Transport Salaried Staffs' Association (TSSA) rail union boss Maryam Eslamdoust has been accused of continuing her war on her own staff, members, and democracy after the union broke its own rules to cut retired union members out of its structures and conference votes.

Eslamdoust is despised by TSSA members and staff, who accuse her of bullying, victimisation of staff and representatives, and of anti-union tactics when they organise against her. Branches have voted overwhelmingly for motions of no confidence in her. Reps in the union's biggest branch, Network Rail voted unanimously last month for her removal - just the latest in a string of no-confidence votes after repeated anti-union attacks on staff and the GMB union that represents them at work.

Eslamdoust even went repeatedly to the Guardian to attack the GMB - and then de-recognised it as the staff's workplace union. Eslamdoust demanded the GMB prioritise her feelings over their members' needs.

The years-long scandal has included attacks on TSSA's internal democracy. She and her team have twice annulled elections in which members had voted her rivals into the key positions of treasurer and president. And on the same day as the latest unanimous vote against her, TSSA declared her ally as the new, uncontested treasurer after again suspending the candidate who beat her. Eslamdoust and her supporters also wrecked the union's conference to prevent another no-confidence vote.

TSSA further splinters

Now, they have staged another attack on the voting rights of members - by unilaterally closing all but one of the union's retired branches.

Eslamdoust has moved all TSSA's retired members from their existing branches into a single branch for the whole UK. The immediate effect of this imposed decision is to reduce the five delegates that the five previous branches could send to the union's conference down to a single delegate. It also cuts the number of motions they can bring from ten to just two. It has been done without any conference vote or approval by the union's various divisional councils and the officers holding roles in the original branches have been summarily removed from their positions.

The move is in breach of the TSSA rulebook and was imposed without warning at a weekend, preventing any opportunity to oppose it before it was a done deal.

Former TSSA assistant general secretary Steve Coe has been expelled from the union for blowing the whistle on the actions of Eslamdoust and her cronies. He posted to his personal social media about the latest assault on democracy that:

I hear that the TSSA Executive Committee has once again decided to ignore the union conference policy, and rig Rule Book and Annual Conference. ​And apparently discrimination on grounds of age is ok with the leadership!!

A retired member quickly responded to confirm the impact:

My branch has been dissolved deleted destroyed which ever you prefer fact no longer on the website!

Steve Coe's Facebook post.

Eslamdoust claims she is being criticised by staff and members because she is female.

TSSA has not responded to a Skwawkbox media enquiry since 2024.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

Health secretary and all round wrong 'un Wes Streeting has revealed his messages with disgraced paedophile's mate Peter Mandelson. Or at least some of them. It was a huge self-own and more revealing than he may have wished.

Streeting may have been hoping that openness would rescue his ambitions to replace his boss when he is (soon) forced out. However, the resulting disgust and mockery have surely put a final nail in the coffin of that nightmare scenario.

Not least because Streeting's Mandelson association is just the latest such link.

Streeting was asked by Sky's Beth Rigby about his messages. It was short and may well have been an exercise intended to neuter the impact of them. But it was still grim:

https://www.thecanary.co/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/tRLvhMaeaxJ8yu-F1.mp4 Streeting might as well have said 'I am toast at the next election'

However, a look at some detail of the messages reveals not just how chummy the health secretary and Mandelson were, but how terrified Streeting is after almost losing his seat in 2024, as PoliticsUK pointed out in an X post. It exposes Streeting's own low opinion of his own party. And it proves that Streeting continued to support Starmer despite having lost faith, and deny that Israel is committing genocide, despite knowing otherwise (emphases added):

[28/03/2025, 11:36:06] Wes Streeting: I fear we're in big trouble here - and I am toast at the next election. We just lost our safest ward in Redbridge (51% Muslim, Ilford S) to a Gaza independent. At this rate I don't think we'll hold either of the two Ilford seats.

[28/03/2025, 11:39:54] Wes Streeting: There isn't a clear answer to the question: why Labour?

[28/03/2025, 11:48:44] Lord Mandelson: The government doesn't have an economic philosophy which is then followed through in a programme of policies.

[28/03/2025, 11:49:15] Wes Streeting: No growth strategy at all

"Israel is committing war crimes"

[24/07/2025, 23:00:29] Wes Streeting: Am sure this will come up in coming days, so wanted to check in with you on recognition of Palestine and the domestic politics of it.

Keir's statement today was excellent, but Macron's statement tonight ups the ante.

Morally and politically, I think we need to join France.

Morally, because Israel is committing war crimes before our eyes. Their government talks the language of ethnic cleansing and I have met with our own medics out there who describe the most chilling and distressing scenes of calculated brutality against women and children.

Politically, a Commons vote will be engineered in September on recognition and we will lose it if we're not ahead of it. There are no circumstances in which people like me or Shabana could abstain or vote against, for example. Conference will be a sea of Palestinian flags and the moderates will be waving them.

We need to be leading the charge on this. The alternative is being dragged there with enormous damage to Keir, the govt and the party.

I've never been a shrinking violent on Israel. I've supported LFI for over 20 years. Our sister party, Haaretz, and progressives are clear about what's being done in their name and they oppose it.

I appreciate these things are always more complicated than they appear to those of us who aren't up close as you are and I also appreciate how much Keir and David are giving to this personally.

But it is what it is. We need to lead, not follow.

[24/07/2025, 23:11:47] Lord Mandelson: I can see all this but I am worried that such a gesture now could blow a 2 SS out of the water if Israel decided that unilateral recognition justified further WB annexation which the US would be powerless to stop or reverse. That would be the end of it.

So I think we need to employ practical means to get a 2SS, not quickly I grant but realistically [written by Mandelson after almost two years of Israel's genocide in Gaza]. The PA with reform and new leadership can advance this with Arab/US/European support. The alternative is a further deadlocked death spiral on an even greater scale than now.

[24/07/2025, 23:12:10] Wes Streeting: Israel is doing it anyway.

[24/07/2025, 23:12:39] Wes Streeting: This is rogue state behaviour. Let them pay the price as pariahs with sanctions applied to the state, not just a few ministers.

But Mandelson is far from unique in Streeting's circle. His former office manager Sam Gould was convicted of child sex offences. One of his closest associates and now fellow MP Jas Athwal was accused of "serious" sexual assault, and the allegations remain murky. Streeting's colleague Ivor Caplin was arrested in January 2025 in a paedophile sting. His other colleague Conor McGinn has just been charged with sex offences.

At what point does a coincidence become a pattern - one that releasing a few direct messages can't mask?

As the @solutionsilford X account commented:

Wes Streeting "never knew" about Conor McGinn. Never knew about Ivor Caplin. Never knew about Ivan Lewis. Never knew about Sam Gould. Never knew about Peter Mandelson. Either the most incurious man in Labour… or taking the public for fools.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

Earlier, Skwawkbox reported on Australian police officers' vicious beating of a restrained and helpless anti-genocide protester. The beating came as police attacked protesters demonstrating peacefully against a visit by war-criminal Israeli president Isaac Herzog.

The attack was not an isolated incident. In yet another assault, police fractured the spine of 69-year-old Jann Alhafny. The Australian government has given police immunity from legal consequences.

Describing the incident, Alhafny said that an officer had pushed her "very violently" to the ground "without warning" as she protested in Sydney - but worse was to come:

I knew straight away I'd hurt my back [but the officer] grabbed one arm and he yanked me up onto my feet, like really severely, and that was excruciating.

Moving someone who has suffered a spinal injury at all, let alone "really severely", can result in permanent paralysis or even death. Doctors later found that Alhafny had four fractured vertebrae. New South Wales Police denied any knowledge.

But police knew they were able to act with impunity. NSW authorities had designated the area a "major event", giving police and the state immunity from 'tortious acts' that cause injury. It appears that state enforcers made full use of this immunity: the march of around 30,000 was kettled and pepper sprayed as well as being beaten.

Alhafny, whose late husband was Palestinian, said she and her daughter would not be deterred from anti-genocide protests:

We always go to the protest, my daughter and I, and it's just the right thing to do. Even if my husband wasn't Palestinian, I'd still be supporting Palestine.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

Zero-click prompt injection can leak data when AI agents meet messaging apps, researchers warn

AI agents can shop for you, program for you, and, if you're feeling bold, chat for you in a messaging app. But beware: attackers can use malicious prompts in chat to trick an AI agent into generating a data-leaking URL, which link previews may fetch automatically.…

Hubble may no longer be the gold standard, but it can still capture some impressive images. The telescope's latest snapshot is our clearest view yet of the Egg Nebula. Roughly 3,000 light-years away from Earth, the nebula's name is derived from its dense layer of gas and dust cloaking a central star.

The new image shows the nebula's four beams of starlight (from that central star) escaping from its gas-and-dust "shell." On either side of the disc-like cloud are fast-moving outflows of hot molecular hydrogen. The orange highlights in this image indicate the glow of infrared light.

As the beams of starlight stretch out from the center, they illuminate concentric rings of gas. The gas's ripple-like pattern suggests it was created by successive bursts from the star, with a little more ejecting every few hundred years.

Hubble image of the Egg Nebula. A disc of gas and dust surrounded by beams of light and concentric rings of dust.SA / Hubble & NASA, B. Balick (University of Washington)

The Egg Nebula, found in the constellation Cygnus, was first discovered in 1975. Nebulae in this preplanetary phase are rare finds. Since the stage only lasts a few thousand years (and because they're often faint), they're relatively difficult for astronomers to spot. By comparing this new image with previous Hubble snapshots of the Egg Nebula, astronomers can learn more about it and shed more light on its processes. But for the rest of us, it makes for some pretty sweet eye candy, right?

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/science/space/hubble-showcases-the-egg-nebula-in-all-its-dying-star-glory-174239769.html?src=rss

CFO and general counsel both step down

IBM services spin-out Kyndryl said it was reviewing its accounting practices after it announced revenue below market expectations and the departure of its CFO.…

As the governance policy designed to protect regional internet registries nears completion

APRICOT 2026 After years of strife, the African Network Information Centre (AFRINIC) is weeks away from signing off on a budget and action plan, activity that one of the organization's newly appointed executives believes demonstrates it is back on track.…

Get ye to Windows Update, because there's a good chance you've got new Secure Boot certificates to install. Microsoft just announced that it will be refreshing those certificates, which were originally introduced when Secure Boot debuted in 2011, as a security precaution. Secure Boot was a way for Microsoft to protect systems from running unsigned and potentially malicious code before Windows launched. It went on to be an installation requirement for Windows 11, as well as anti-cheat software used in Valorant, Call of Duty: Black Ops 6/7 and Battlefield 6.

Without the new Secure Boot certificates, Microsoft says your system will still function normally, but it will enter "a degraded security state that limits its ability to receive future boot-level protections." Basically, you won't be protected from malware and viruses targeting vulnerabilities in older versions of Windows. As expected, Microsoft also notes that unsupported versions of Windows won't be receiving the new Secure Boot certificates. They're only coming to Windows 11 systems, as well as Windows 10 PCs subscribed to Microsoft's Extended Security Updates.

Microsoft says many users will be able to pick up the updated Secure Boot certificates by visiting Windows Update, but a few may need additional firmware updates from their system (or motherboard's) OEM. You'll also be able to track the status of your security certificates in the Windows Security app in the "coming months."

"As cryptographic security evolves, certificates and keys must be periodically refreshed to maintain strong protection," Nuno Costa, Partner Director of Windows Servicing and Delivery, wrote in a blog post today. "Retiring old certificates and introducing new ones is a standard industry practice that helps prevent aging credentials from becoming a weak point and keeps platforms aligned with modern security expectations."

Costa says Microsoft has been working with OEMs like Dell and HP to ensure a smooth transition to the new Secure Boot certificates. Many new systems built in 2024 already have the updated certs, while "almost all" devices shipped last year have them as well. Microsoft has also been alerting IT customers to this transition since last year.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/computing/microsoft-will-start-refreshing-secure-boot-certificates-in-march-for-windows-11-and-windows-10-esu-users-170000777.html?src=rss

There appears to be no limit to how chonky and eye-wateringly expensive PC gaming handhelds can get, with the latest behemoth being the Ayaneo Next 2. First announced back in November, the latest Windows handheld in Ayaneo's Next lineup is now up for pre-order, with a spec sheet that makes some of its rivals look modest.

If you missed the announcement at the end of last year, the Next 2 is packing a 9-inch OLED display with a 2,400 x 1,504 resolution and a maximum refresh rate of 165Hz (adjustable down to 60Hz). The Next 2 is powered by an AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 chip and has a massive 115Mh battery under the hood.

To put all of that into perspective, the Next 2's display is more than 1.5 inches larger than the Steam Deck OLED's, and goes bigger than even the Lenovo Legion Go 2's 8.8-inch panel. Its battery is the largest of the three by some margin too, and according to Ars Technica it weighs in at around 3.14 pounds (around 1424g), making it more than twice as heavy as the very heavy Xbox ROG Ally X. Get those wrists to the gym if you're considering picking one of these up.

Ayaneo is ticking all the boxes where inputs are concerned too. Its latest handheld has dual touchpads (a feature ASUS left out on the ROG Xbox Ally X), Hall Effect sticks, an 8-way D-Pad and four customizable rear buttons.

All of this tech inevitably comes at a high price, with the entry-level model that ships with 32GB of RAM and 1TB of storage coming in at $1,999, or $1,799 if you take advantage of early bird pricing. This model is equipped with the slightly less capable Ryzen AI Max 385 CPU.

If you want the more powerful AI+ 395 chip you have a few options. A variant of the Next II with 64GB of RAM and 1TB of storage costs $2,699, but you can order now at the early bird price of $2,299. For 128GB of RAM and 2TB of storage you'll be handing over a slightly hilarious $4,299 at full price. Early birds can order now for $3,499.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/pc/the-ayaneo-next-2-is-a-massive-pc-handheld-with-a-price-tag-to-match-165326534.html?src=rss

A US judicial body has revised an internal document to remove climate research. The Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence is a document used by judges when they have to oversee cases involving complex scientific matters. The climate science chapter has now been deleted, so they'll be on their own with climate-related cases.

This move came after a group of Republican state attorneys wrote a letter to complain about the chapter on climate change. The language in the document, which was authored by researchers from Columbia University, suggests that climate change is driven by the actions of humans. This was a no-go to those state attorneys, despite being an established fact.

"Nothing is 'independent' or 'impartial' in issuing a document on behalf of America's judges declaring that only one preferred view is 'within the boundaries of scientifically sound knowledge,'" the letter states. It's worth noting that the document is nearly 2,000 pages long and declares preferred views on numerous subjects, though the state attorneys only have an issue with the one.

The Republicans also complained that the report called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change an "authoritative science body." The grounds for this complaint seem to derive from a short paper from a Canadian conservative think tank.

US court agency pulls climate change from science advisory document https://t.co/2ornJlJN1X

— Ars Technica (@arstechnica) February 10, 2026

The letter's authors would not settle for any revisions, according to a report by Ars Technica. Rather, they demanded the entire chapter be removed. So it was removed and now judges can rule on climate cases using the tried and true method known as "vibes."

Interestingly, the introduction of the document by Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan still mentions the climate chapter. They had better break out some correction tape. The full text of the now-deleted chapter has been posted by RealClimate, if you want to give it a gander.

More than 99.9 percent of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is real and caused by humans. It looks like some segments of society want a judicial system ruled by that remaining 0.01 percent.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/big-tech/us-judicial-body-removes-climate-research-paper-after-complaints-from-republicans-164829295.html?src=rss

Supermassive Games has announced a new release date for the next entry in the Dark Pictures Anthology series. Directive 8020 is coming to PS5, Xbox Series X/S and Steam on May 12. The studio behind Until Dawn and The Quarry revealed the news with the help of a fresh trailer for the sci-fi survival horror game.

The story focuses on the crew of a spaceship that has crash landed onto another world. The survivors have to contend with an alien lifeform that's hunting them and can mimic its prey (no prizes for guessing that Supermassive took inspiration from The Thing here). If these astronauts want to stay alive, though, they'll put the lives of everyone on a dying Earth at risk.

As with Supermassive's previous games, Directive 8020 is largely driven by the narrative choices players make at key moments, such as whether to save a crewmate and put the character you're currently controlling at risk, or to abandon them. You might also have to pick between two seemingly identical versions of the same person and let one of them back into the crew. The game has segments in which you'll have to fight or stealthily avoid enemies as well.

This time around, Supermassive is introducing a feature called Turning Points, through which you can go back to previous decisions and opt for another path (perhaps to see different endings more easily, keep certain characters alive or make sure you get all the achievements or trophies). A permadeath mode does away with that option for a more traditional survival horror experience. 

You can go it alone or get some friends to join you for five-player local co-op action — the studio's games have long been good fodder for pass-the-controller couch co-op. Supermassive will add online multiplayer support down the line.

The developer originally planned to release Directive 8020 in October 2025. However, Supermassive announced last July that it was delaying the game amid its latest round of layoffs.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/directive-8020-brings-sci-fi-survival-horror-to-ps5-xbox-series-xs-and-pc-on-may-12-163358560.html?src=rss

Google provided Immigration and Customs Enforcement with a wide array of personal data on a student activist and journalist, including his credit card and bank account numbers, according to a copy of an ICE subpoena obtained by The Intercept.

Amandla Thomas-Johnson had attended a protest targeting companies that supplied weapons to Israel at a Cornell University job fair in 2024 for all of five minutes, but the action got him banned from campus. When President Donald Trump assumed office and issued a series of executive orders targeting students who protested in support of Palestinians, Thomas-Johnson and his friend Momodou Taal went into hiding.

Google informed Thomas-Johnson via a brief email in April that it had already shared his metadata with the Department of Homeland Security, as The Intercept previously reported. But the full extent of the information the tech giant provided — including usernames, addresses, itemized list of services, including any IP masking services, telephone or instrument numbers, subscriber numbers or identities, and credit card and bank account numbers — was not previously known.

"I'd already seen the subpoena request that Google and Meta had sent to Momodou [Taal], and I knew that he had gotten in touch with a lawyer and the lawyer successfully challenged that," Thomas-Johnson said. "I was quite surprised to see that I didn't have that opportunity."

The subpoena provides no justification for why ICE is asking for this information, except that it's required "in connection with an investigation or inquiry relating to the enforcement of U.S. immigration laws." In the subpoena, ICE requests that Google not "disclose the existence of this summons for indefinite period of time."

Thomas-Johnson, who is British, believes that ICE requested that information to track and eventually detain him — but he had already fled to Geneva, Switzerland, and is now in Dakar, Senegal. 

Related Google Secretly Handed ICE Data About Pro-Palestine Student Activist

The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which is representing Thomas-Johnson, and the ACLU of Northern California sent a letter to Google, Amazon, Apple, Discord, Meta, Microsoft, and Reddit last week calling on tech companies to resist similar subpoenas in the future from DHS without court intervention. The letter asks the companies to provide users with as much notice as possible before complying with a subpoena to give them the opportunity to fight it, and to resist gag orders that would prevent the tech companies from informing targets that a subpoena was issued.

"Your promises to protect the privacy of users are being tested right now. As part of the federal government's unprecedented campaign to target critics of its conduct and policies, agencies like DHS have repeatedly demanded access to the identities and information of people on your services," the letter reads. "Based on our own contact with targeted users, we are deeply concerned your companies are failing to challenge unlawful surveillance and defend user privacy and speech."

In addition to Thomas-Johnson's case, the letter refers to other instances in which technology companies provided user data to DHS, including a subpoena sent to Meta to "unmask" the identities of users who documented immigration raids in California. Unlike Thomas-Johnson, users in that case were given the chance to fight the subpoena because they were made aware of it before Meta complied.

Lindsay Nash, a professor at Cardozo Law and a former staff attorney with ACLU Immigrants' Rights Project, said that by not giving prior notice, Google deprived Thomas-Johnson of his ability to protect his information.

"Your promises to protect the privacy of users are being tested right now."

"The problem is that it doesn't allow the person whose personal information is on the line and whose privacy may be being invaded to raise challenges to the disclosure of that potentially private information," Nash said. "And I think that's important to protect rights that they may have to their own information."

Google did not respond to a request for comment.

Tech companies' data sharing practices are primarily governed by two federal laws, the Stored Communications Act, which protects the privacy of digital communications, including emails, and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive trade practices.

"Under both federal law and the law of every state, you cannot deceive consumers," said Neil Richards, a law professor at Washington University St. Louis who specializes in privacy, the internet, and civil liberties. "And if you make a material misrepresentation about your data practices, that's a deceptive trade practice."

Whether or not corporations are clear enough with consumers about how they collect and share their data has been litigated for decades, Richards said, referencing the infamous Cambridge Analytica lawsuit brought by the Federal Trade Commission, alleging that the company misled Facebook users about data collection and sharing.

Google's public privacy policy acknowledges that it will share personal information in response to an "enforceable governmental request," adding that its legal team will "frequently push back when a request appears to be overly broad or doesn't follow the correct process."

According to Google, the company overwhelmingly complied with the millions of requests made by the government for user information over the last decade. Its data also shows that those requests have spiked over the last five years. It's unclear how many of those users were given notice of those requests ahead of time or after.

Richards said that cases like these emphasize the need for legal reforms around data privacy and urged Congress to amend the Stored Communications Act to require a higher standard before the government can access our digital data. He also said the federal government needs to regulate Big Tech and place "substantive restrictions on their ability to share information with the government."

It's hard to know exactly how tech companies are handling our personal data in relation to the government, but there seems to have been a shift in optics, Richards said. "What we have seen in the 12 months since the leaders of Big Tech were there on the podium at the inauguration," Richards said, "is much more friendliness of Big Tech towards the government and towards state power."

From Dakar, Thomas-Johnson said that understanding the extent of the subpoena was terrifying but had not changed his commitment to his work.

"As a journalist, what's weird is that you're so used to seeing things from the outside," said Thomas-Johnson, whose work has appeared in outlets including Al Jazeera and The Guardian. "We need to think very hard about what resistance looks like under these conditions… where government and Big Tech know so much about us, can track us, can imprison, can destroy us in a variety of ways."

The post Google Handed ICE Student Journalist's Bank and Credit Card Numbers appeared first on The Intercept.

Numerous major social platforms including Meta, YouTube, TikTok and Snap say they will submit to a new external grading process that scores social platforms on how well they protect adolescent mental health. The program comes from the Mental Health Coalition's Safe Online Standards (SOS) initiative, which comprises about two dozen standards covering areas like platform policy, functionality, governance and transparency, content oversight and more. The SOS initiative is led by Dr. Dan Reidenberg, Managing Director of the National Council for Suicide Prevention.

In announcing these companies' participation, the Mental Health Coalition writes "SOS establishes clear, user-informed data for how social media, gaming, and digital platforms design products, protect users ages 13-19, and address exposure to suicide and self-harm content. Participating companies will voluntarily submit documentation on their policies, tools, and product features, which will be evaluated by an independent panel of global experts."

After evaluation, the platforms will be given one of three ratings. The highest achievable safety rating is "use carefully," which comes with a blue badge that compliant platforms can display. Despite being the highest rating, the requirements seem fairly run-of-the-mill. The description includes things like "reporting tools are accessible and easy to use," and "privacy, default and safety functions are clear and easy to set for parents." As for what actions the standards ask of the companies being rated, the "use carefully" rating says "platforms and filters help reduce exposure to harmful or inappropriate content."

The other ratings include "partial protection" which is described in part as "some safety tools exist on the platforms, but can be hard to find or use," and "does not meet standards" which would be given if "filters and content moderation do not reliably block harmful or unsafe content."

The Mental Health Coalition, founded in 2020, has mentioned Facebook and Meta as partners since the early days of the organization. In 2021 the organization said it would bring together "leading mental health experts partner with Facebook and Instagram to destigmatize mental health and connect people to resources" during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In 2022 the nonprofit published a case study with "support from Meta" that found "mental health content on social media can reduce stigma while increasing individuals' likelihood to seek resources, therefore positively impacting mental health."

In 2024, the MHC "in partnership with Meta" launched a campaign called the Time Well Spent Challenge. In it, the group urged parents to have "meaningful conversations" with teens about "healthy" social media use, focusing less on whether teens should be on these apps at all and more on keeping them on-platform in a "time well spent" way, from reduced screen time to "using social media for good" and reviewing their feeds together.

That same year it partnered with Meta again to establish "Thrive," a program that allows tech companies to share data regarding materials that violate self-harm or suicide content guidelines. The Mental Health Coalition lists Meta as a "creative partner" on its website.

Last year it was alleged that Meta buried internal data showing the ill effects of its products on users' mental health. The internal research, dubbed "Project Mercury," began in 2020. Since then the company has introduced some bare-minimum attempts at addressing mental health concerns, such as Instagram teen accounts. Meta is now on trial in California facing allegations over child harm from addictive products, the first in a series of upcoming lawsuits against the social media giant.

Other companies participating in the rating program include Roblox, which has recently faced stiff accusations over the wellbeing of children on the platform, and Discord which has beefed up its age-verification processes in response to its own serious child endangerment concerns.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/social-media/meta-tiktok-and-snap-are-participating-in-an-online-safety-ratings-system-162921333.html?src=rss

The internet is ripe with horrible violations of people's privacy, including non-consensual explicit images. A new tool from Google won't do much in the way of prevention, but can help you remove this media from Search. 

Now, you can choose an image and quickly request its deletion. Just click on the three dots that appear on the image. From there, choose "remove result" and then "It shows a sexual image of me." Other choices include the picture shows a person under 18 and that it has your personal information. If you choose the initial option then you will also be asked whether it contains a real image or deepfake. There's also an option to submit multiple photos at once. 

Google claims that, upon submitting your request, you will "immediately" see links to emotional and legal support organizations. Plus, you can opt-in to safeguards that filter out similar results in Search — though it seems these unreported images will still be available for other users to see. This feature should be available in most countries over the coming days. 

You can go on Google's "Results about you" hub to track your request. To use the tool, you will have to add in your personal contact information and government ID numbers. Google already had the hub to track if any of that information appears on Search, but now it will also look for your social security number, drivers license and passport information. The company should notify you if any of that information comes up in Search results and allow you to take removal steps. 

Results about you's updates should roll out to US users in the coming days. Notably, it arrives as Google shutters its dark web reports. They would alert you if your name, number, or email address appeared on the internet — typically because of a data breach. However, Google found it didn't help users take next steps to fix the problem, something these new features will hopefully do. 

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/cybersecurity/googles-new-tool-helps-you-remove-non-consensual-explicit-images-from-search-155352248.html?src=rss

FCC boss Brendan Carr is back with yet another fake "investigation" of media outlets he deems insufficiently deferential to radical (and increasingly unpopular) right wing ideology. This time it involves Carr launching a phony non-investigation of ABC's The View. The crime? They apparently didn't kiss MAGA Republican ass with enough zeal:

"The Federal Communications Commission is opening an investigation into whether ABC's "The View" daytime talk show violated equal time rules for interviews with political candidates after an appearance by a Democratic Texas Senate candidate this week, a source told Reuters on Saturday."

This, to be clear, isn't a real investigation. Carr's office is likely the Reuters source. And he previously hinted this was coming. As we mentioned then,  Carr is threatening to leverage the "equal time" rule embedded in Section 315 of the Communications Act to take action against talk shows that don't provide "equal" time to Republican ideology.

The rule is a dated relic that would be largely impossible for the Trump FCC to actually enforce. Republicans like Carr historically despised the equal time rule — an offshoot of the long-defunct Fairness Doctrine, a problematic effort to ensure media fairness (specifically on broadcast TV) they long complained was unconstitutional. Until they found a "President leader" with no ethical or moral center.

The rule was originally created to apply specifically to political candidate appearances on broadcast television, since back then, a TV appearance on one of the big three networks could make or break and politician attempting to run for office. In the years since, the rule has seen numerous exemptions and, with the evisceration of the regulatory state by the right wing, isn't seriously enforceable.

That's not stopping weird Trump zealots like Carr, who is keen to abuse FCC authority he doesn't really have to harass media companies that don't adequately bend the knee to kakistocracy. Anna Gomez, the FCC's lone Democrat Commissioner, has done a good job with messaging pointing out that Carr is a dangerous, but highly performative, hack:

"Like many other so-called 'investigations' before it, the FCC will announce an investigation but never carry one out, reach a conclusion, or take any meaningful action," she said. "This is government intimidation, not a legitimate investigation."

As Gomez notes, most of this stuff goes nowhere. On one hand, it's decorative cack Carr leaks to gullible media outlets to make it appear like he's doing important things. On the other hand, it's still designed to stifle journalistic freedom and the First Amendment by warning media companies that they'll face protracted and costly legal headaches if they refuse to kiss Republican ass.

Keep in mind that ABC and Disney executives have already repeatedly tripped over themselves to curry favor with our embarrassing government, including paying Trump a $15 million bribe to settle a baseless lawsuit they were likely to win. They're doing this because they like lower taxes, mindless deregulation, and rubber-stamped media consolidation. They couldn't care less about journalism or viewpoint diversity.

These are cases that not only are winnable, many excellent lawyers would be willing to help fight them. And yet our media giants are still pathetic and feckless. It's another good lesson about how even if you think kissing up to autocrats is a financial win, it doesn't pay great returns over the longer haul. There is never a point where you will be deemed dutifully obedient, and akin to Vader's management of Bespin's Cloud City, the arrangement can and will always get worse.

Our increasingly broken corporate press struggles (or simply refuses) to communicate that Carr's goal isn't equality; it's the disproportionate coddling and normalization of an extremist U.S. right wing political movement that's increasingly despised by the actual public.

It was this steady media deterioration at the hands of the right wing and corporate power that opened the door to Trump's buffoonery in the first place. And, without a serious progressive media reform movement (which needs to include publicly funded media, serious media consolidation limits, ownership diversity rules, and creative new funding models for real journalism), it's only going to get worse.

The obvious end point, if people of conscience can't galvanize useful policy reform, will be the sort of state media control we seen in countries like Russia and Hungary. At which point, all of the problems we're seeing now at the hands of our violent, dim autocrats will only get worse.

US president Donald Trump is determined to starve Cuba of oil in his bid for control of the Western hemisphere. Cuba buys oil from Mexico despite heavy US sanctions. Now Trump is threatening to hit Mexico with tariffs.

Trump has also been channeling a mix of Cold War and War on Terror rhetoric to justify himself. He's accused Cuba of hosting Russian spies AND Hamas and Hezbollah agents. Any one will do, right?

Trump increasing belligerence

The New York Times reported that although Trump did not name the US's southern neighbour:

The threat seemed to be directed at Mexico, one of the few countries still delivering oil to Cuba. Earlier this month, he even said that he had specifically asked President Claudia Sheinbaum of Mexico to cut off its supply.

Mexico is a key regional ally of the Cuban government:

Mexico and Cuba's long alliance — rooted in economic and cultural cooperation and a shared wariness of U.S. intervention — survived and even deepened after the Cuban Revolution, when Mexico preserved ties with Havana even as much of the region aligned with Washington.

And Mexico has been juggling the alliance amid Trump's increased belligerence. No oil has been sent since January, but the Mexican navy delivered humanitarian aid. Sheinbaum told reporters on 9 February:

No one can ignore the situation that the Cuban people are currently experiencing because of the sanctions that the United States is imposing in a very unfair manner.

Trump has threatened to hit targets in Mexico under the guise of his pseudo-war on drugs. This is the same rationale he has used to airstrike small boats in the Caribbean and Pacific since September 2025. And the same rationale he used to kidnap Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro on 3 January 2026. Anti-communism

Trump is no more a fan of having a 'communist' nation close by than any other US leader. But his Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a son of Cuban refugees, is even more neurotically anti-Cuba.

The Cuban ambassador to the UN Ernesto Soberón Guzmán laid into Rubio in a Newsweek interview on 7 February:

What is clear to me is that Rubio has never come to Cuba, and he's talking about something he knows nothing about.

He said Rubio's position was contradictory because of how own family had fled the pre-Castro US-backed regime:

His parents came to the United States before the revolution. It's false this image people have that they came to the United States running away from the revolution.

They came to the United States fleeing the dictatorship that existed in Cuba, which was supported by the U.S. government at the time, under [then Cuban President Fulgencio] Batista.

Guzman suspected Cuba lived rent-free in Rubio's head:

Whether it's harmful or not, whether it's clinically harmful or not, whether it's clinically proven, that's something you have to find out as a journalist.

But there is a also bigger geopolitical picture beyond the contents of Rubio's brain.

The bigger picture

Oil politics and the personal obsessions of Trump's goons clearly play a part in the current situation. It's also important to recall Cuba was effectively the first colony in what would become the US's global empire. And US policy now has reverted in some ways to the gunboat diplomacy of an era which saw the US attack Cuba, the Philippines, and China in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

Trump's National Security Strategy (NSS) demands control of the hemisphere. In some ways, this is a return to the old Monroe Doctrine which helped drive US empire building in the first place.

The NSS asserts:

The United States must be preeminent in the Western Hemisphere as a condition of our security and prosperity—a condition that allows us to assert ourselves confidently where and when we need to in the region.

For the US, is it 'our way or the highway' on the American continent. Or rather: our way or you'll be starved, shot, drone-struck, and/or kidnapped into submission.

Accusations about foreign influence in Cuba echo the NSS precisely:

Some foreign influence will be hard to reverse, given the political alignments between certain Latin American governments and certain foreign actors.

And at the heart of US strategy, as ever, are the demands of the American market:

The choice all countries should face is whether they want to live in an American-led world of sovereign countries and free economies or in a parallel one in which they are influenced by countries on the other side of the world.

The Trump administration is driven by greed, ego, and a yearning for hegemony. This isn't so different from its predecessors, Trump and his lackeys are just more open about it. What is different is that the US empire's decline is rapidly turning into a freefall. And a wounded beast is a dangerous thing, as Cubans and Mexicans are well aware.

Featured image via the Canary

By Joe Glenton

Military tech firm Palantir are hosting a lavish party at the Ministry of Defence (MOD) to celebrate their massive new contract. The firm's founders, who have expressed far-right and anti-democratic views, seemed pleased at having penetrated the highest echelons of the British state. And their takeover has disgraced Labour politician Peter Mandelson's fingerprints all over it.

In a bizarre twist, the head of MI5 just warned about Chinese infiltration of British universities. But not a word was uttered about how a CIA-linked, Trump-aligned military data firm has penetrated British military and health infrastructure.

The Times reported on 10 February 2026:

Senior military officers and civil servants have been invited to the evening reception in Mayfair on Wednesday to mark the company's £241 million three-year deal to "boost military AI and innovation".

As well as UK military contracts, Palantir has also penetrated the National Health Service (NHS). And both the Labour and the previous Conservative government have gladly invited them in.

An invitation seen by The Times said:

Join us for an evening reception as we reflect on our decade-long support of the armed forces, thank those who have been part of the journey and look towards an ever more ambitious new chapter — one that will deliver cutting-edge data and AI capabilities to UK defence, establish London as our European defence headquarters, and see investment in British innovation, jobs and national security.

Other military and arms firms like Babcock will also demonstrate their wares at the event.

Palantir have a Mandelson link

Disgraced peer Peter Mandelson was a key architect of the deal. The Guardian described the situation succinctly:

Palantir, a $300bn company that provides military technology to the Israel Defense Forces and AI-powered deportation targeting for Donald Trump's ICE units, has UK government contracts worth more than £500m. Global Counsel, a lobbying company Mandelson co-founded and part-owns, also works for Palantir.

UK PM Keir Starmer, who is hanging on by a thread over allegations he knew about Mandelson's links to Epstein before making him US ambassador, visited Palantir HQ in February 2025. That meeting was allegedly brokered by Mandelson:

But there is no formal record of what was said. The Foreign Office says it holds no emails confirming the arrangements.

Defence secretary John Healey has defended the £240m deal. Palantir has up to £500m in UK contracts overall:

Peter Mandelson has no influence on any MoD contracts. The Palantir decision was mine.

Adding:

Palantir offer unique capabilities with a unique track record and that's why we've struck the agreement with them.

Foreign office minister Stephen Doughty said:

Officials from our embassy in Washington arranged this trip in the normal way.

But Tory shadow cabinet minister Alex Burghart said the visit:

did not appear in the prime minister's register of visits and came to light later in subsequent disclosures.

The Times reported:

Palantir was and still is a client of Global Counsel, the lobbying firm that Mandelson co-founded. His shares are in the process of being divested and Mandelson would not have financially benefitted from the deal, it is understood.

Thiel and Karp

Alex Karp and Peter Thiel are the most prominent figures at Palantir. Both Karp and Thiel are linked to Donald Trump. Their politics are openly far-right. And now they have access to great swathes of the British state, including defence and health. In a bizarre twist, Palantir's UK chief is Louis Mosley - grandson of British fascist leader Oswald Mosley.

As Action on Armed Violence's Iain Overton warned on April 2025:

But make no mistake: Palantir is no neutral software vendor. It is the digital vanguard of a globalised military-industrial complex that sees citizens not as people to be protected, but as data points to be mapped, managed — and monetised. It's own tag line (according to a series of posters recently put up in University campuses) is "We build to dominate."

And let's be clear, this is no mere tech firm. Palantir is another example of the imperial boomerang, born out of the War on Terror and the CIA:

Palantir grew rich off the back of the post-9/11 security state, with seed funding from the CIA's venture capital arm, In-Q-Tel. It developed its tools in tandem with US intelligence, border enforcement, and drone warfare programmes.

Overton added:

It helped track "terrorists" abroad, surveil migrants at home, and model crime in cities riddled by systemic inequality.

Green Party leader Zack Polanski has railed against Palantir's role in the NHS:

And advocacy group, the Citizens, is currently lobbying for a full debate on Palantir's UK contracts:

Despite the company's deep embedding in government systems, there has been no comprehensive scrutiny of costs, data governance, ethical risks or national sovereignty.

They also warned:

Internationally, Palantir has been linked to controversial immigration enforcement in the US, criticised for its role in military operations in Gaza, and rejected by authorities in Switzerland over data and dependency concerns.

The British government, shaky as it is, seems absolutely determined to keep Palantir onboard. The situation is frankly bizarre. For example, the head of MI5 has just issued a warning that Chinese intelligence is trying to infiltrate British universities. Ken McCallum also announced a £3m round of measures to secure UK educational institutions. Yet Palantir, a foreign firm with deep links to the intelligence agencies of the current crackpot US regime, has taken over parts of the UK's critical defence infrastructure and services - and been paid handsomely for the pleasure.

Featured image via the Canary

By Joe Glenton

Urgh, I already hated Kid Rock, because he's always seemed like a greasy nonce. Now, a newly resurfaced clip seems to confirm it:

BREAKING: Disturbing video of Kid Rock has resurfaced, as he wonders why American men were waiting for the then-14 year old Olsen twins to turn 18. "if there's grass on the field, play ball!"

That's who MAGA supports. https://t.co/qrEJw40Spr

— Really American

Once again, Reform have publicly shit the bed, and this time it's over Bangor University. Well, more specifically, the Bangor Debating and Political society, but that didn't stop Reform's head of policy Zia Yusuf threatening the whole fucking uni:

Bangor University have banned Reform and called us "racist, transphobic and homophobic".

Bangor receives £30 million in state funding a year, much of which comes from Reform-voting taxpayers.

I am sure they won't mind losing every penny of that state funding under a Reform… pic.twitter.com/piUPlBzEcY

— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) February 9, 2026

Very normal behaviour there, Yusuf.

Well done Bangor, you've pissed off Reform

Personally, I would like to say well done to the debate society. But members of Reform massively shit the bed over it, including wannabe councillor Nick Pritchard:

The only issue I have with Pritchard kicking off is why in the name of hell does anyone care about the opinion of a man who "fabricated allegations" about a local resident trying to procure someone to shoot him?

Pritchard, mate, you're in no position to debate anyone.

And of course Richard Tice spat his dummy out about it:

Simple

In line with our values, if Bangor Uni does not believe in free speech, then British taxpayers should not have to fund them.

Perhaps remove all government funding and no student loans for Bangor students

The phone will ring very soon https://t.co/3ZmtmbXea8

— Richard Tice MP

Okay, I am sick of writing about this 'Amelia' AI schoolgirl now. But yet again, it appears a far-right group has adopted this fake child as some kind of mascot.

Although this time, it's a group of women. Odd.

We're fed up of the safety of women and girls being sacrificed for the comfort of migrant men.

WE ARE ALL AMELIA! The movement has just begun. pic.twitter.com/p7QtuPtLVy

— Women's Safety Initiative (@WomenSafety_UK) February 7, 2026

Why are you cosplaying as a literal schoolgirl?

You see, the issue I have with the far right using Amelia as some kind of mascot is where this avatar came from.

Amelia is a purple haired goth girl, and she wasn't born in some racist WhatsApp group. She was created by the government to be a part of a video game called Pathways which taught kids about extremism.

Oh, and she's a fucking college-aged child. 16 to 18 years old. Yet the amount of knuckle-draggers on the internet sexualising her is absolutely disgusting:

Amelia's emergence over the last week was explosive, injecting a sexually charged, romantic energy into British nationalism. AI image generation enables ownerless memetic characters to be collaboratively generated faster than ever before. Amelia was the first to step through this… pic.twitter.com/NAbBxERJOw

— John Carter (@martianwyrdlord) January 17, 2026

#Amelia #ai pic.twitter.com/yJeFEizMXU

— ASHURA (@Ashura_GG) February 2, 2026

She's meant to be a fucking child. Yet here we see the Women's Safety Initiative cosplaying as her and drinking a pint.

Come on girls, do better. When you put yourself under a banner of protect all women, surely you shouldn't be masquerading as a fucking child whilst doing so?

Let's look a little deeper at who is in that video

On closer inspection, you can see the founder and director of Women's Safety Initiative, Jess Gill, right there in the video. And she loved it:

"Anon, why didn't I see you at the mass deportation protest?" https://t.co/j9QjnYEwUA pic.twitter.com/W2wV53Y2k3

— Jess (@jessgill03) February 7, 2026

Bit weird.

Jess, who claims to be British but hates everything about British food, has become a polarising figure at demonstrations. I mean, surely if you're going to attend a demo to 'protect our women' with the racist Pink Ladies, you wouldn't be happy to share a space with ex-Reform MP and known wife beater James McMurdoch?

Well done to the Pink Ladies in Chelmsford today.

This brave lot are standing up for the safety of women and girls. The shame of course is that they shouldn't be having to do this at all.

"I'm not far right. I'm worried about my kids" pic.twitter.com/8ZlhHk1eTk

— James McMurdock MP (@JMcMurdockMP) November 22, 2025

Now you're cosplaying as an underage teen girl and quaffing pints?

Using women's rights for political clout

As a woman, I am absolutely sick to fucking death of the far right using women's safety as a weapon.

I don't get it guys. When 97% of rape claims have not even been brought to charge, why are these women playing dress up as a kid? And a goth kid at that? I thought you hated bright coloured hair?

Can we stop dressing up as heavily sexualised kids as some kind of icon and actually focus on the absolute state of policing? Rape is borderline legal in the UK now when you look at conviction rates, and it pisses me off that these far right women don't actually give a fuck. The only time they care about women is when they're whipping up hatred against migrants.

Using attacks against women to hide your racism is fucking disgusting.

Featured image via X

By Antifabot

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.

Reform UK are charging prospective parliamentary candidates £250 to stand in upcoming elections.

Talk about pricing working-class people out of politics.

Reform are charging people £250 to apply to be a Parliamentary candidate. https://t.co/qbVAE9WZjF pic.twitter.com/yf3IvotzCf

— Evolve Politics (@evolvepolitics) February 9, 2026

Previously, the party charged £125 to apply to stand in Gorton and Denton. This was despite the party having zero intention of actually selecting them.

Why if Reform are hoping to persuade a 'big name candidate' to run in the by election have they asked members to pay £125 to apply when they have no intention of selecting them or giving them a fair shot?

It's shameless money making off the backs of working class members pic.twitter.com/lDXfuLgUaF

— Sophie Corcoran (@sophielouisecc) January 25, 2026

Other political parties in the UK don't do this. What's making this situation worse is that Reform UK has the largest paid membership in the country, and is balls-deep in donations from dodgy donors.

Reform: grifters be grifting

Farage is a grifter - he always has been. Whether it's selling crappy football shirts to try and raise a few quid, or outpricing working people from politics - his nerve has no end.

It's just one big grift. https://t.co/ExXUjg5wIe

— Alwyn Maynard (@AlwynMaynard) February 10, 2026

"But don't worry were for the average person" you just have to have a pile of cash to play in the first place. https://t.co/iUDToEvmaV

— viper (@vipersssssssss) February 10, 2026

Making the rich (ahem, Farage) even richer, whilst raising council tax and shafting the rest of us.

making the rich richer while they do absolutely fuck all for you. https://t.co/Wvn0EShazg

— kieran

Claudia Webbe is an ally of Jeremy Corbyn and a former Labour MP. On 9 February, she criticised a Your Party (YP) group said to represent Black members. The group in question is the Your Party Black Network (YPBN):

Black members helped build Your Party.

We're reclaiming our narrative from @YPBlackNetwork. Your theft of our identity ends here. Your weaponisation of Black struggle ends here. You do not speak for us.

We are shutting this down. See our statement here

Charles Windsor has again been heckled over his brother Andrew and serial child-rapist Jeffrey Epstein. The monarch was on a visit to Clitheroe in Lancashire and ignored questions before clambering into his car. He faced a similar crowd response last week in an Essex village and before that in the Scottish town of Stirling.

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has again been in the headlines after more images of him appeared in the latest Epstein files release. The new images show him looking creepily up at the camera as he looms over a prone, redacted, presumably young girl. Other files show him sending Epstein 'confidential' information about 'investment opportunities'. Others reveal Epstein flying a woman to the UK for him and that he and Epstein asked a stripper for a threesome at Epstein's home.

One heckler in Clitheroe demanded to know whether Charles has "pressurised the police to start investigating Andrew?"

A palace spokesman has since said that the parasite king will "support police" in inquiries.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

A progressive organizer beat the odds against millions in outside spending to win the special primary election for a congressional seat in New Jersey, offering a promising sign to left insurgents in the coming midterms and revealing a severe miscalculation on the part of the pro-Israel lobby. 

Former Rep. Tom Malinowski conceded the race in New Jersey's 11th Congressional District on Tuesday to Analilia Mejia, former political director for Sen. Bernie Sanders's 2020 presidential campaign, after initial results showed a slim margin between the two candidates for several days.

Mejia won "despite being outspent essentially ten-to-one by not just AIPAC and outside groups but also the New Jersey political machine," said Antoinette Miles, state director for the New Jersey Working Families Party. Mejia previously led the group, which backed her campaign and helped organize her field operation. 

Related AIPAC Donors Fail to Elect Last-Minute New Jersey House Pick

"No one would really categorize this district as being a left district," Miles said, pointing to the race as a sign progressive candidates can connect with voters in more moderate districts. A Republican represented the district until 2019, when former Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen retired and former Rep. Mikie Sherrill was elected. 

With the deck stacked against Mejia and little public polling in the three months since Sherrill vacated the seat to take office as New Jersey governor, there was no clear front-runner in the race. Internal polling in the final weeks of the race showed Malinowski and Mejia pulling ahead and almost equally matched, with New Jersey Lt. Gov. Tahesha Way further behind in third place, according to a source with knowledge of the data. 

Rather than targeting Mejia, the pro-Israel lobby spent more than $2 million against Malinowski, likely splitting moderate voters, while known pro-Israel donors directed funding in Way's favor. United Democracy Project, the super PAC for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, spent on ads attacking Malinowski, and AIPAC donors flooded Way's campaign with more than $50,000 in the final weeks of the race. The strategy, which UDP said was meant to help them elect the more pro-Israel candidate because Malinowski had previously questioned the provision of unconditional aid to Israel, appeared to backfire, as some observers predicted. 

"This election is a clear rejection of AIPAC by Democratic voters — AIPAC's spending and support for candidates is becoming a kiss of death in Democratic primaries because of the work our movement has done to expose them," said Justice Democrats spokesperson Usamah Andrabi. The group did not endorse in the race but said Mejia's win was a positive sign for the left as midterms progress. 

"This is a clear sign that the Democratic electorate is desperate to elect new leaders — like the dozen of working-class champions we're supporting in primaries this cycle — that aren't bought by AIPAC, crypto, AI, or any other corporate lobby that has created the intentionally weak and ineffective Democratic Party failing us in Congress right now," Andrabi added.

In a statement released on Tuesday, Malinowski pointed to AIPAC's influence in the race.

"Analilia deserves unequivocal praise and credit for running a positive campaign and for inspiring so many voters on Election Day," Malinowski wrote. "But the outcome of this race cannot be understood without also taking into account the massive flood of dark money that AIPAC spent on dishonest ads during the last three weeks. I wish I could say today that this effort, which was meant to intimidate Democrats across the country, failed in NJ-11."

On Friday, United Democracy Project issued a statement signaling it's still paying close attention to the race ahead of the general election in April. 

"The outcome in NJ-11 was an anticipated possibility, and our focus remains on who will serve the next full term in Congress. UDP will be closely monitoring dozens of primary races, including the June NJ-11 primary, to help ensure pro-Israel candidates are elected to Congress," UDP said in a statement posted on X. 

Some corners of the Democratic establishment are also reeling from the results of the race. After spending close to $2 million to back Way, the Democratic Lieutenant Governors Association has not made any public statements since results started rolling in on Thursday evening. DLGA did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

In an email to supporters on Thursday night, the Democratic National Committee prematurely congratulated Malinowski on winning the race. The release was later removed from the DNC website.

The Democratic establishment hasn't recently had to run in competitive primaries in the district, Miles pointed out, while progressives had been preparing for this moment. 

"That says something about the shift that is happening in New Jersey right now," Miles said. "This is the first race — at least at the congressional level — in which there is an open primary, the possibility for better candidates to run, the possibility for new ideas, and the machine is being tested."

The post AIPAC Just Helped Put a Bernie Sanders Alum in Congress appeared first on The Intercept.

As communities push back on utility costs, White House tells Big Tech to fund their own AI expansion

The Trump administration continues its AI push, working to defuse public opposition to datacenter energy and water consumption - while dangling a promise to exempt hyperscalers from chip tariffs to help them stock their facilities with GPUs and accelerators.…

More prompts when apps and agents roam around a user's system

Microsoft is introducing a raft of Windows security features that users and administrators alike might assume are already part of the operating system.…