Business Sentiment
Sentiment Legend:
Negative < 44
Mixed 46-54
Positive > 56
The Trump administration is reportedly crafting a $50 billion supplemental funding request aimed at financing its war.
Support justice-driven, accurate and transparent news — make a quick donation to Truthout today!
Democratic members of Congress are facing renewed pressure to oppose any Trump administration funding requests to help bankroll its illegal, open-ended war on Iran after congressional Republicans — along with a handful of pro-war Democrats — voted this week to defeat efforts to end the assault, which is costing US taxpayers roughly $1 billion per day.
In a statement after House Republicans and four Democrats voted down an Iran war powers resolution late Thursday, the ACLU implored Congress “to use its funding authority to block all supplemental funding requests for war funding from the Department of Defense while President Trump is engaging in this unconstitutional war.”
“Without Congress authorizing additional funds, the military will simply run out of money to spend on the war,” the group added.
The Trump administration is reportedly crafting a $50 billion supplemental funding request aimed at financing its war, which has killed more than 1,000 Iranians and counting. Politico reported Thursday that Republicans are “debating whether to attach wildfire aid and $15 billion in tariff relief for farmers” to the supplemental funding measure in an effort to attract Democratic support.
The National Priorities Project (NPP) has noted that $50 billion would be enough to extend enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies for a year, restore federal nutrition assistance to millions who are set to lose it due to the Trump-GOP budget law, and expand Medicaid to nearly 2 million people.
“The question isn't whether the money exists — it's what we choose to spend it on,” NPP's Alliyah Lusuegro and Lindsay Koshgarian wrote Thursday. “There's never been a better time to call your members of Congress. We need to oppose this war before it's too late.”
Some Senate Democrats — including Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee — have not ruled out voting for a possible supplemental funding bill for the Pentagon, even as the annual US military budget cleared $1 trillion.
“We have to look at what they need,” Reed said earlier this week. “Some of it might be to fill in critical issues and other theaters of war they've taken things from.”
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) told HuffPost that she “would like to understand the goals of the war before I decide how I feel about the funding of the war.”
Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, wrote Thursday that “both practically and politically, a vote to fund the war is a vote for the war — a war Americans cannot afford and do not want.”
The progressive advocacy group MoveOn said its members “consider a vote for the supplemental a vote in favor of Donald Trump's war.”
“Any member of Congress who rubber stamps another dime for this war of choice should expect to hear from our members,” the group added.
To break the 60-vote filibuster in the Senate, Republicans would need at least seven Democrats to cross the aisle.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) expressed emphatic opposition to the floated supplemental funding bill in a social media post on Thursday.
“I'm a hell no on funding for Trump's illegal, disastrous Iran War,” Murphy wrote.
As Trump cracks down on political speech, independent media is increasingly necessary.
Truthout produces reporting you won't see in the mainstream: journalism from the frontlines of global conflict, interviews with grassroots movement leaders, high-quality legal analysis and more.
Our work is possible thanks to reader support. Help Truthout catalyze change and social justice — make a tax-deductible monthly or one-time donation today.
Jake Johnson is a staff writer for Common Dreams. Follow him on Twitter: @johnsonjakep.
Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.
US military investigators reportedly believe US forces carried out the strike that killed 175 people, mostly children.
Did you know that Truthout is a nonprofit and independently funded by readers like you? If you value what we do, please support our work with a donation.
A House lawmaker and UN experts are calling for an “immediate” investigation into the strike on an elementary school in Minab, Iran, that massacred 175 people, mostly children, as a growing body of evidence suggests that U.S. forces were responsible for the strike.
“There needs to be an immediate and transparent investigation into this strike. I'm demanding answers on what is being done to protect innocent civilians in Iran,” said Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Arizona) in a post on X on Thursday.
A group of seven UN human rights experts also signed a statement on Friday saying that the strike must be investigated as a war crime.
“A strike on a school represents a grave assault on children, on education, and on the future of an entire community,” the experts said. “An attack on a functioning school during class hours raises the most serious concerns under international law and must be urgently, independently, and effectively investigated, with accountability for any violations.”
Iranian health officials and state media have reported that 175 people were killed in the strike on the school on February 28, as the U.S. and Israel unleashed their first bombardment of their war on Iran. The vast majority of them were children aged between 7 and 12, UN officials have said. One of the victims was reportedly a 2-month-old baby.
No one has taken responsibility for the strike. U.S. officials have said that they are investigating the strike, and have neither confirmed nor denied responsibility. “We're investigating that. We, of course, never target civilian targets. But we're taking a look and investigating that,” said Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.
However, there is mounting evidence that the U.S. was responsible for the attack. U.S. military investigators believe that U.S. forces carried out the strike, Reuters reported on Thursday, citing two officials familiar.
Investigations and analyses by CNN, the New York Times, and NPR have said that imagery, timing, and location of the strike suggest that it was done by U.S. forces. The strike was done at the same time as “precision strikes” on adjacent Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps buildings, though the school has been clearly cordoned off as a civilian site for at least a decade.
The reporting that the school was hit in “precision strikes,” and reporting by Al Jazeera, suggest that the school was struck intentionally. Middle East Eye also reports that whoever is responsible carried out a “double-tap” strike on the school, hitting it a second time to kill those who rushed to rescue survivors.
“My little girl was completely burned,” one man who lost his child in the attack told Middle East Eye. He says his daughter survived the first strike, but was killed when she was moved to the prayer hall for protection. “There was nothing left of her. We could only identify her from her school bag, which she was still holding. She was completely burned.”
“When I saw her smile after coming home from work, all my pain disappeared. Now I don't know what to do with this pain. I don't know how to live with this,” he said.
The attack echoes some of the worst atrocities carried out by the U.S. military in history. In March of 1968, American soldiers gunned down the village of My Lai, Vietnam, killing between 350 to 500 unarmed civilians, including children. Only one U.S. soldier was ever convicted for the horrific massacre, known as one of the worst war crimes ever committed by the U.S. military.
U.S. officials have insisted that the U.S. does not target civilian infrastructure. However, UNICEF reported on Thursday that at least 20 schools have been damaged in Iran amid the U.S. and Israel's carpet bombing campaign, while the World Health Organization has reported that at least 13 hospitals and health facilities have been hit in the first week of the bombardment.
As Trump cracks down on political speech, independent media is increasingly necessary.
Truthout produces reporting you won't see in the mainstream: journalism from the frontlines of global conflict, interviews with grassroots movement leaders, high-quality legal analysis and more.
Our work is possible thanks to reader support. Help Truthout catalyze change and social justice — make a tax-deductible monthly or one-time donation today.
This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the following terms:
Sharon Zhang is a news writer at Truthout covering politics, climate and labor. Before coming to Truthout, Sharon had written stories for Pacific Standard, The New Republic, and more. She has a master's degree in environmental studies. She can be found on Twitter and Bluesky.
Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.
Police say Masood Masjoody was most likely murdered; Iranian expats suspect he was killed for his criticism of the theocratic regime
Police in Canada have concluded that a missing Iranian activist was most likely the victim of murder, prompting fears that his disappearance has the hallmarks of a transnational repression campaign targeting critics of Tehran.
Masood Masjoody, a mathematician critical of both Iran's theocratic regime and the exiled family of the former shah, went missing in early February in the city of Burnaby, British Columbia.
Police are still searching for Masjoody's body, and a spokesperson for the integrated homicide investigations team, which is part of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), said all of the evidence investigators have collected indicates foul play.
“We are treating this as a homicide,” Sgt Freda Fong said.
Activists who have documented Iran's recent deadly crackdown on protesters fear the disappearance reflects a policy of attempting to silence members of the diaspora community who are critical of the Iran's theocracy.
“[Masood] has been very vocal against not only opposition groups, but also the regime,” said Tadayon Tahmasbi, an Iranian based in the Netherlands. Tahmasbi, who survived an attempt on his life in June 2024 believed to be linked to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), said the regime in Tehran is working “to stifle and silence voices abroad more than it ever did before”.
“I can only hope the truth of his disappearance and those behind it are caught. For now, we across the diaspora are very worried for Masood,” he added.
Masjoody obtained his doctorate in mathematics from Simon Fraser University in Burnaby, specializing in discrete mathematics and graph theory. He was hired as a sessional instructor that same year and taught mostly undergraduate courses, including one on analytical and quantitative reasoning.
But Masjoody sparred with the mathematics department, including a clash over his “alternative grading system” and his class assignments. He also faced allegations of sexual harassment and made repeated misogynistic and violent posts on social media targeting female colleagues. He was terminated for “just and reasonable cause” in 2020.
His subsequent 2021 lawsuit against the university and colleagues, which he lost, alleged a “conspiracy, weaponizing my personal life against me, defamation, and wide-spread cover-up” in part enabled by “malicious efforts on behalf of Khamenei's regime”. But he also warned Canadian authorities about what he believed was Iran's “alarming infiltration” of postsecondary institutions in the country – including at Simon Fraser University.
In a letter to then prime minister Justin Trudeau, Masjoody said he had flagged Iranian regime programs that were involved in sensitive engineering and technology fields and warned that technologies developed in Canada could be brought back to Iran for nefarious purposes.
He also sued a local news outlet, the social media company X and members of the Iranian community. But last year, BC's court of appeal barred Masjoody from initiating or continuing any appeals without its permission, citing a years-long pattern of “habitual, persistent, and without reasonable cause” litigation.
A judge found that Masjoody's suits had escalated, including instances in which he alleged Simon Fraser University administrators were enabling “spies from the Islamic Republic of Iran” and called one judge “reprehensible”, “inhumane” and “barbarically biased”.
Sgt Fong said most of the tips provided to police have come from the Iranian community, but she said that unless they find a body, it can be “very difficult” to bring any criminal charges.
Police have provided little information about the scope of the investigation or if they have suspects.
“Any speculation over whether Iran was involved would be premature and compromise the integrity of the investigation,” said Fong, adding it was “understandable” that activists and members of the public considered it a possibility.
“Masood was very vocal about his views and didn't shy away from telling the world about it,” said US-based Alborz Pakravan, an exiled Iranian economist who worked with Masjoody in activist circles. “In the aftermath of the massacre [of protesters] in Iran, I am afraid this is a part of the revenge campaign led by the Islamic Republic against dissidents abroad. It's impossible to not speculate that someone this vocal was a problem and it points to the regime weaponising transnational repression to silence us.”
In addition to warnings from Canada's intelligence agency over foreign interference from Iran, a 2024 report from the France-based Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime found that Iran relied on “clusters of foreign currency exchange brokers” to launder funds and finance terrorist proxies, including “nodes” in large Canadian cities like Toronto and Vancouver.
That same year, Iran is believed to have targeted prominent critics within Canada. In November 2024, former Canadian justice minister Irwin Cotler said he had been the target of an alleged Iranian assassination plot. The RCMP warned Cotler, a fierce critic of Iran's government, of an “imminent assassination attempt within the next 48 hours”.
Cotler had drawn the ire of Iran's clerics for his campaign to list the IRGC as a terrorist entity, which Canada did in 2024.
“In particularly alarming cases over the last year, we've had to reprioritise our operations to counter the actions of Iranian intelligence services and their proxies who have targeted individuals they perceive as threats to their regime,” the head of Canada's spy agency, Dan Rogers, said in November. “In more than one case, this involved detecting, investigating and disrupting potentially lethal threats against individuals in Canada.”
Pakravan said that Masjoody's disappearance “has brought to light the consequences of speaking openly” against Tehran, adding that governments must “take seriously how dangerous this regime has been”.
US military officials briefed on investigation make disclosure, while Pentagon has confirmed only that inquiry is under way
Minab school bombing: how the worst mass casualty event of the Iran war unfolded – a visual guide
Military investigators believe it is likely that US forces were responsible for an apparent strike on an Iranian girls' school that killed scores of children on Saturday but have not yet reached a final conclusion, according to two US officials.
Reuters was unable to determine further details about the investigation, including what evidence contributed to the tentative assessment, what type of munition was used, who was responsible or why the US might have struck the school.
The Pentagon chief, Pete Hegseth, on Wednesday acknowledged the US military was investigating the incident.
Two US officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters, did not rule out the possibility that new evidence could emerge that points to another responsible party.
The girls' school in Minab, in southern Iran, was hit on Saturday during the first day of US and Israeli attacks on the country. Iran's ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Ali Bahreini, said the strike killed 150 students. Reuters could not independently confirm the death toll.
The Pentagon referred questions to Central Command, whose spokesperson, Capt Timothy Hawkins, said: “It would be inappropriate to comment given the incident is under investigation.”
The White House did not directly comment on the investigation, but its press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said in a statement: “While the Department of War is currently investigating this matter, the Iranian regime targets civilians and children, not the United States of America.”
Asked during a news briefing on Wednesday about the incident, Hegseth said: “We're investigating that. We, of course, never target civilian targets. But we're taking a look and investigating that.”
The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, told reporters on Monday that the US would not deliberately target a school.
“The Department of War would be investigating that if that was our strike, and I would refer your question to them,” Rubio said.
Israeli and US forces have, until now, divided their attacks in Iran geographically and by target type, a senior Israeli official and a source with direct knowledge of the joint planning said. While Israel was striking missile launch sites in western Iran, the US was attacking similar targets, and naval ones, in the south.
The UN human rights office has called for an investigation into the attack on the school, without saying who it believed was responsible.
“The onus is on the forces that carried out the attack to investigate it,” Ravina Shamdasani, a UN human rights office spokesperson, told a press briefing in Geneva.
Images of the girls' mass funeral on Tuesday were shown on Iranian state television. Their small coffins were draped with Iranian flags and passed from a truck across a large crowd towards the grave site.
Deliberately attacking a school or hospital or any other civilian structure would probably be a war crime under international humanitarian law.
If a US role were to be confirmed, the strike would rank among the worst cases of civilian casualties in decades of conflicts in the Middle East.
Russia is providing Iran with intelligence about the locations and movements of American troops, ships and aircraft, according to multiple people familiar with US intelligence reporting on the issue, the first indication that Moscow has sought to get involved in the war.
Much of the intelligence Russia has shared with Iran has been imagery from Moscow's sophisticated constellation of overhead satellites, one of the people said. It is not clear what Russia is getting in return for the assistance.
CNN has asked the Kremlin and the Russian embassy in Washington for comment.
It is also not clear whether any single Iranian attack can be linked to Russian targeting intelligence, which was first reported by the Washington Post. But several Iranian drones have hit locations where US troops have been in recent days. An Iranian drone struck a makeshift facility housing US troops in Kuwait on Sunday, killing six US service members, CNN has reported.
One of the sources briefed on the intelligence said, “This shows Russia still likes Iran very much.”
The US also has intelligence suggesting that China may be preparing to provide Iran with financial assistance, spare parts and missile components, three people familiar with the matter said, though Beijing has stayed out of the war up until now. China relies heavily on Iranian oil and has reportedly been pressuring Tehran to allow safe passage for vessels through the Strait of Hormuz.
“China is more cautious in its support. It wants the war to end because it endangers their energy supply,” one of the sources familiar said.
The CIA declined to comment. CNN has asked the Chinese embassy in Washington for comment on the suggestion China may be preparing to assist Iran.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters on Wednesday that Russia and China are “not really a factor” in the war with Iran.
Russia and Iran have been cooperating for at least the last three years on missile and drone technology, with Iran providing Russia with Shahed drones and short-range ballistic missiles to target Ukraine and helping to set up a massive drone factory to pump out Iranian-designed drones inside Russia. Iran has in turn sought Russia's help to bolster its nuclear program, CNN has reported.
The US operation against Iran currently involves more than 50,000 troops, more than 200 fighter jets and two aircraft carriers, CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper said this week, and administration officials have not said how long the war is expected to last. The US military objective, according to Pentagon officials, is to eliminate Iran's ballistic missile capabilities, which Pete Hegseth said this week Iran was using as a “shield” to develop its nuclear program.
© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app on Google Play.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app from the Apple Store.
Justice department said the files were initially withheld because they were mistakenly categorized as duplicates
Sign up for the Breaking News US email to get newsletter alerts in your inbox
The US justice department released additional files related to Jeffrey Epstein on Thursday, including FBI memos describing interviews with a woman who made uncorroborated allegations against Epstein and Donald Trump.
The documents were not included in the justice department's earlier releases of Epstein-related records, which began in December. Justice department officials have said the files were initially withheld because they were mistakenly categorized as duplicates.
Trump has consistently denied any wrongdoing related to Epstein or any knowledge of Epstein's criminal activity.
The materials released on Thursday, which the Guardian obtained and reported on last week, describe a series of FBI interviews conducted in 2019 with a woman who alleged that she had been sexually assaulted by Epstein, and by Trump, in the 1980s, when she was a minor. The woman had contacted the FBI shortly after Epstein's 2019 arrest on federal sex trafficking charges.
Her allegations have not been verified, and the FBI never brought charges related to her claims. The Guardian reported last week that some of her statements appear to contradict what is known about Epstein's life in the early 1980s.
In a statement to the Guardian, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, called the woman's allegations “completely baseless” and said that they are “backed by zero credible evidence”.
“The total baselessness of these accusations is also supported by the obvious fact that Joe Biden's department of justice knew about them for four years and did nothing with them – because they knew President Trump did absolutely nothing wrong,” Leavitt said. “As we have said countless times, President Trump has been totally exonerated by the release of the Epstein Files.”
In January, the justice department said that “some of the documents contain untrue and sensationalist claims against President Trump that were submitted to the FBI right before the 2020 election”.
“To be clear, the claims are unfounded and false, and if they have a shred of credibility, they certainly would have been weaponized against President Trump already,” they added.
On Thursday, the justice department said in a statement that it had “reviewed public allegations” that some documents were missing from the Epstein files release and said that it had identified “15 documents were incorrectly coded as duplicative”.
“Additionally, the southern district of Florida separately determined that five prosecution memos that were initially marked as privileged could be released while still protecting the privileged materials,” they said. “All 20 of these documents are now live.”
The new release comes as Democrats last week launched an investigation into whether the justice department had intentionally withheld materials in its releases of the Epstein files related to allegations involving Trump.
It also comes as last week, five Republicans on the House oversight committee joined Democrats to subpoena Pam Bondi, the US attorney general, to answer questions about the justice department's investigation into Epstein, and its handling of the document releases.
Evidence compiled by CNN suggests that the United States military was responsible for the strike on an elementary school in southern Iran that killed scores of children, in what is the deadliest incident of civilian casualties in the US and Israel's almost week-long war with Iran. Isobel Yeung reports.
© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app on Google Play.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app from the Apple Store.
Opposite experiences in two different tent camps in Gaza show how the world could be caring better for displaced people.
Truthout is an indispensable resource for activists, movement leaders and workers everywhere. Please make this work possible with a quick donation.
Approximately 92 percent of homes in the Gaza Strip have been destroyed since October 7, 2023. According to United Nations estimates, around 436,000 housing units have been damaged or destroyed as a result of Israeli airstrikes and military operations.
Less than a week after the war began, on October 13, 2023, Israeli forces issued evacuation orders for northern Gaza, forcing over 1 million Palestinians to move southward to areas such as Khan Younis and Al-Mawasi, which were presented to residents as “safe zones.” However, these areas were not prepared to accommodate such a massive influx of displaced people, lacking the infrastructure and health services needed to cope with successive waves of displacement.
As the bombing continued and evacuation orders expanded, residents flocked to the Al-Mawasi area from across the Gaza Strip — from northern and central Gaza, and especially the eastern border areas near the fence. The neighborhoods along the eastern border were among the first to experience heavy shelling due to their geographic location, and my family was among those forced to leave under constant fear and repeated warnings.
Later, on January 3, 2024, the building that housed our home was bombed and leveled. It was an eight-story building occupied by 32 families. In an instant, it was turned to rubble, leaving all those families homeless — another number added to the destruction statistics. Behind each figure is a home, memories, and a life destroyed in an instant.
Before the war, Al-Mawasi was known as a quiet coastal stretch west of Khan Younis, comprising open agricultural land, sandy and uneven, with scattered plastic houses and seasonal farms. It was not an urban area or a densely populated center but an open space used for farming, with proximity to the sea.
However, with the start of mass displacement orders, these open lands quickly became one of the most crowded areas in the Gaza Strip. Within weeks, tents covered nearly every empty space. There was no longer “open land,” but instead rows of fabric and nylon, tents pressed tightly against one another with barely any space in between.
How can such a place be considered a “safe zone” when it lacks the most basic necessities for life? No proper sewage systems, no organized infrastructure, no spacing between families, and not even enough room to pitch a new tent. Many families had nowhere to set up their tents, let alone space to store water or build a makeshift toilet nearby.
Al-Mawasi transformed from open agricultural land into a chaotic tent city, unplanned, unprotected from heat or cold, and without any health system capable of preventing disease spread.
I spoke with several current and former residents of Al-Mawasi about the struggles they face under these conditions. These are just a few stories out of thousands who continue to suffer in Gaza's tent camps.
“Illness Has Become Part of Our Daily Life”
Hussam is a 10-year-old boy who has suffered from unhealthy conditions in Al-Mawasi, developing severe skin rashes and allergies due to insects and the environment inside the tents. His mother, Samira Al-Ali, a mother of four, says Hussam's daily suffering has never stopped since they were forcibly displaced from northern Gaza:
My husband was killed at the start of the war in an airstrike on our home in northern Gaza. We lost everything, our home was destroyed, and we moved to Al-Mawasi into a small tent that does not protect from sun or rain, and Hussam suffers from constant itching and rashes. There is no safe place for children to play, and the heat, dust, and insects make life very difficult.
Samira, with tears in her eyes, describes how moving to Al-Mawasi was not a real solution but a continuation of relentless suffering:
We thought Al-Mawasi would be safe, but the reality is completely different. The tents are overcrowded, each family clings to the next, there is no space to set up a new tent, not even for water containers or a toilet. Life here is extremely hard, and illness has become part of our daily life.
Saleh Al-Swafiri, 75, and his wife Nasreen, 74, lost all their children at the start of the war when their home in northern Gaza was destroyed in an airstrike. Unhoused, they joined other families in Al-Mawasi, facing new daily challenges despite claims that the area was “safe.”
Saleh describes, with a trembling voice:
Every day we have to walk long distances to fetch water from far points, and cooking on a fire has become an exhausting task for our bodies. There are no flat spaces to pitch tents, no health facilities, not even a small area to rest or move around. Everything here is difficult, everything is exhausting.
Nasreen adds:
We lost our children, and our suffering here grows every day. The tent is cramped, the heat, sand, and wind make life nearly impossible, and we need water, food, and medicine, but the conditions make accessing them nearly impossible.
Their story reflects the immense physical and psychological pressure facing elderly residents in Al-Mawasi, where the open land, extreme overcrowding, and lack of services make daily life a continuous struggle for survival.
Samah Al-Kurd, a mother of one with a husband, like many of the other families I interviewed for this piece, initially fled to Al-Mawasi after her apartment in a high-rise in Al-Zahra (in central Gaza) was destroyed. She lived for a year and a half in tightly packed tents on uneven sandy ground in Al-Mawasi, without reliable access to drinking water, health services, or basic facilities.
Later, however, she had an eye-opening experience that made clear how more humanitarian support could alleviate some of the suffering that Palestinians living in makeshift camps are currently experiencing: She participated in a project run by the Egyptian Committee, a state-affiliated organization, which established an organized camp for displaced families from Al-Zahra in central Gaza. The camp contains approximately 200 tents and provides essential facilities: water reaches each tent, two meals are distributed daily to each family, and cleaning supplies and vouchers are regularly supplied.
Samah explains the stark difference between the camps:
Even amid destruction, in Al-Zahra I felt safety and order. Everything was organized, the tents had spacing, and food and water were reliably available. This is completely different from Al-Mawasi, where overcrowding is severe, tents touch each other, and every day [its residents] struggle to secure basic needs.
Her experience highlights the importance of planning and organization in camps and shows how replicating this approach in other areas could improve life for thousands of displaced families, instead of relying on chaotic, overcrowded settlements that only increase suffering.
The reality in Gaza's informal displacement camps shows that open land alone is insufficient to provide a decent life for the displaced. Severe overcrowding and lack of infrastructure and basic services make these camps into environments full of health and living hazards. Organized camps, like Al-Zahra, demonstrate that even simple planning and access to water, food, and essential services can significantly alleviate suffering. Ensuring safe and organized living conditions for displaced people is not a luxury — it is a fundamental human right that must be met immediately.
As Trump cracks down on political speech, independent media is increasingly necessary.
Truthout produces reporting you won't see in the mainstream: journalism from the frontlines of global conflict, interviews with grassroots movement leaders, high-quality legal analysis and more.
Our work is possible thanks to reader support. Help Truthout catalyze change and social justice — make a tax-deductible monthly or one-time donation today.
This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the following terms:
Eman Abu Zayed is a writer and journalist from Gaza who believes in the power of words to change reality.
Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.
President Donald Trump said on March 6 that he wants unconditional surrender from the Iranian regime and would then work to “bring Iran back from the brink.” His comments come in the midst of a week-long U.S. and Israeli military campaign targeting the country.
Detailing what the administration wants from Iran to potentially stop the military operation that took out the Islamic Republic's top leadership, Trump wrote on social media that “there will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”
The Board of Governors overseeing the new curricula includes roofing contractors, insurance execs, and no professors.
Truthout is an indispensable resource for activists, movement leaders and workers everywhere. Please make this work possible with a quick donation.
Imagine the following scenario: You're teaching Introduction to Sociology at a community college in Florida, and today, you're trying to explain the well-documented pay gap between men and women in the United States. You check the guidance you just received from your dean, who received instructions via email from the executive vice chancellor of the Florida College System. The instructions state explicitly that explaining “unequal outcomes between men and women” in terms of “institutional sexism” would violate state law.
So how are you supposed to explain this disparity? The email includes guidance on just this question:
biological sex chromosomes determine … how females and males behave … So, in teaching this, one might point out that women and men with the same credentials enter different jobs such that certain jobs are occupied primarily by women (i.e., female-dominant) some are occupied primarily by men (i.e., male-dominant).
Did you misread the guidance? Your eyes scroll up on the page, which is a state-created curriculum for use in all non-elective Intro to Sociology classes taught in Florida's community colleges. You are explicitly prohibited from discussing “systemic racism, institutional racism, [or] historical discrimination.” You cannot “state an intent of institutions today to oppress persons of color.” You cannot “describe when, how, or why individuals determine their sexual orientation and/or gender identity.”
Surely this is a mistake?
Far from it. Last semester, my department at Florida International University received word that the Florida Board of Governors, which oversees the state's public university system, had determined that none of our syllabi were in compliance with state law. It seemed to many of us that the board was proceeding from a willfully broad interpretation of the law, so we asked our provost for guidance.
The law in question is Florida Statute 1007.25, which is, frankly, incoherent. If I were to try to render it intelligible, I would point out that the law prohibits any mention of “identity politics,” though it never specifies what is meant by this contested term. It also bans “theories that systematic racism, sexism, oppression, and privilege are inherent in the institutions of the United States.” What exactly “inherent” is doing in this sentence remains a mystery. Are we allowed to teach theories of systematic oppression if we historicize them, refusing to reduce them to “inherence”? Can we teach them in contexts beyond the U.S.? All of this remains unclear, as state officials read these lines as a carte blanche for purging race, gender, and inequality from the curriculum altogether.
At this point, not only are professors being told what they cannot teach; they are also being told what they must teach.
In August 2025, the provost's office requested compliance guidelines from the Florida Board of Governors. What did faculty need to do in order to bring their curricula into compliance with state law? In response, the Board of Governors formed a committee, launched in October, that was tasked with producing two items: first, a set of guidelines for compliance, and second, a special textbook that would be compliant with the law.
The committee included two sociology professors from the university system, two from the college system, and an unspecified number of political appointees without any background in the discipline. Among these political appointees were Jason Jewell, who was appointed the state's chief academic officer after directing a “Great Books” program at a small Christian college in Alabama; and Jose Arevalo, the aforementioned executive vice chancellor of the state's college system. Arevalo was hired after writing a dissertation at Hillsdale College on “Great Books” proponents like Mortimer Adler and Allan Bloom. (In this context, “Great Books” is shorthand for the promotion of the Western canon.) It was Arevalo who sent the email to deans with the list of prohibited topics.
Pretty quickly, one of the four sociologists on the committee was removed — and now remains suspended from teaching at his college — for allegedly professing “gender ideology.” In practice, this professor simply referenced the existence of gender non-conformity. No matter. He was removed from the committee, which was now operating under the open threat of repression. His removal sent a message, in other words, to the other sociologists on the committee, and to those of us teaching around the state.
What happened next is hard to discern, since the working group did not operate in public view.
Political appointees from the business world, from insurance executives to roofing contractors, are dictating how professors must teach their courses and even providing state-created textbooks for doing so.
The Florida Board of Governors, which had already determined that no existing Introduction to Sociology syllabus complied with the board's ideological preferences, also determined that no existing intro to sociology textbook was legal to teach in the state of Florida. Instead, the working group somehow decided that it would be a good idea to take an existing open-source textbook, published under a Creative Commons license, and bowdlerize it, reducing it from nearly 700 pages to just over 250.
The working group entirely jettisoned whole chapters on race and ethnicity, gender and sexuality, social stratification, and global inequality. Words like “racism” and “discrimination,” which appeared roughly 120 times each in the original, now appear 25 times combined. Countless additional topics were cut, or else mangled, and most comparisons of the U.S. to other countries were removed.
Then, immediately before winter break, in mid-December 2025, my department's chair received a call from the provost, who had in turn been called by a staffer from the Florida Board of Governors' office. The chair proceeded to call each faculty member who was scheduled to teach Intro to Sociology, asking them to use the state-created, censored textbook.
As a department, we pushed back, demanding the directive in writing. If this is about compliance with the law, why are these administrators and bureaucrats too terrified to issue mandates via email? The example with which I opened this column — college deans receiving a written directive from Executive Vice Chancellor Arevalo — was highly exceptional. In general, their strategy appears to be covering their tracks. As the sociologist Max Weber famously put it, modern bureaucracies are “based upon written documents (‘the files'), which are preserved in their original or draft form.” What the Florida Board of Governors is doing then is attempting to avoid bureaucratic constraints, moving instead toward personalized, discretionary power.
These phone calls amount to suggestions rather than formal orders, but many of the professors pressured in this way have been working to carry out the censorship edicts nonetheless. In other words, this is a textbook example of anticipatory compliance. Until these suggestions are put into writing, it is incumbent upon Florida educators to ignore them. Certainly, we should organize to contest them, but until they are in writing, we must refuse to acknowledge them as official directives.
As we know well from historical precedent, authoritarian regimes rely heavily on anticipatory compliance. For that is precisely what Florida has become: an authoritarian regime. At this point, not only are professors being told what they cannot teach; they are also being told what they must teach.
These state directives are telling us to abandon professional ethics and to refuse to root our lessons in existing sociological literature.
The Florida Board of Governors, meanwhile, does not include a single academic, or even anyone with a background in education administration. These are political appointees from the business world, from insurance executives to roofing contractors, who are dictating how professors must teach their courses and even providing state-created textbooks for doing so.
What are sociologists supposed to do in this context? These state directives are telling us to abandon professional ethics and to refuse to root our lessons in existing sociological literature, abandoning the norms of our professional organization, the American Sociological Association. Instead, we are being openly threatened if we do not teach what amounts to state-produced propaganda.
The very concept of modern academic freedom first emerged in Medieval Europe as a means of safeguarding free inquiry from political interference. Its more contemporary incarnation, with origins in early 19th-century Berlin, was similarly framed: research and teaching were to be defended against local political authorities.
Here we are over a century later, trying to teach and do research in Florida, and the state is openly rejecting any semblance of academic autonomy. Instead, political appointees, working in conjunction with elected officials and, unfortunately, compliant faculty, are attempting to force politically convenient propaganda on us, insisting that such materials constitute a curriculum. They do not.
We are being openly threatened if we do not teach what amounts to a state producing its own propaganda.
Lest readers assume this is some kind of Florida exceptionalism, it is far from it. State governments and university administrations in Texas, Indiana, North Carolina, Iowa, Oklahoma, Kansas, Mississippi, Arkansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Wyoming, Tennessee, North Dakota, Georgia, and likely other states too are currently involved in similar efforts. In New Hampshire, the House just passed a bill named after Charlie Kirk that bans the teaching of “critical theories or related practices that promote division, dialectical world-views, critical consciousness or anti-constitutional indoctrination.”
Nor is this just about sociology. References to anthropogenic climate change are disappearing from earth science departments. Historians are being told that they can only teach primary sources, with all second-order reflection on those sources — what we used to call “history” — being stigmatized or even banned. Literature professors are being told that they can only teach the “Western canon.”
All of this is to say that this fight is not about sociology in Florida; it is about resisting authoritarianism on a national scale. We must defend sociology in Florida because we defend academic teaching and inquiry, free from state interference, everywhere in our country. If we do not nip this in the bud in Florida, other states will continue to emulate this authoritarian model.
What can faculty in affected states do? Two actions are crucial as a point of departure. First, they should refuse anticipatory compliance. Government officials want to terrify educators so that they act in excess of what is required. They therefore need to always demand written directives.
And second, they should talk to their colleagues. These directives always attempt to isolate them, with orders being passed through the phone to individual instructors. This is a deliberate strategy of preemptive demobilization. To push back, educators need each other. They must discuss these pressures openly in faculty meetings. They should build connections with faculty on campuses across the state to see how directives are being issued unevenly. They need to form an Academic Freedom Committee in their Faculty Senate, as we just did here at Florida International University for the first time. And they should work through their unions, or where that isn't possible, through their local American Association of University Professors chapter. If they don't have one, this is a perfect time to build one.
But this isn't just about professors; it's about all of us. This is the most flagrant attack on higher education in my lifetime. Why are politicians reducing public colleges and universities to vehicles of state propaganda? Why are self-proclaimed proponents of free speech turning around and using state repression to enforce speech codes on our campuses? Why can't we speak openly about our social world in sociology classes? Why are unqualified appointees from the business world dictating to Ph.D.-holding academics how they should teach and which textbooks they must use?
We are not propagandists, but professors.
What we really need are people beyond the university itself — the general public — speaking out about how ludicrous this all is. We are now living through an era of state censorship, politically motivated firings, and state-produced propaganda materials. If this isn't authoritarianism in higher education, I don't know what is.
Giving in isn't going to get these ideologues off our backs. They are openly telling us what they are up to, working to reduce the social sciences and humanities to an appendage of the state. We are not propagandists, but professors. If we don't defend academic freedom with everything we've got, the public university will soon be a relic of the 20th century.
Truthout is funded almost entirely by readers — that's why we can speak truth to power and cut against the mainstream narrative. But independent journalists at Truthout face mounting political repression under Trump.
We rely on your support to survive McCarthyist censorship. Please make a tax-deductible one-time or monthly donation.
This article is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), and you are free to share and republish under the following terms:
Zachary Levenson is associate professor of sociology at Florida International University. He is the author of the award-winning book Delivery as Dispossession (Oxford University Press, 2022).
Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.
Read the latest news on Ukraine and Hungary here: Kyiv slams Hungary taking 'hostage' Ukrainian bank staff carrying gold bars, millions in cash.
'Not acceptable' — EU rebukes Zelensky over Orban 'threat.'
Editor's note: The story has been updated with the latest details.
President Volodymyr Zelensky said on March 5 he hopes the blocking of a 90 billion euro ($107 billion) European Union loan for Ukraine by "one person" will end, warning that otherwise he could give that individual's address to Ukraine's military.
Zelensky did not name the person, but the remarks appear aimed at Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who has blocked the loan amid a dispute over the suspension of the Druzhba pipeline.
Orban wrote on X prior that his country would "break" what he described as a Ukrainian oil blockade "by force."
"There will be no deals, no compromise," Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban wrote.
The Ukrainian president didn't hold back.
"We hope that one person in the EU will not block the 90 billion euros — or at least the first tranche of it — so that Ukrainian soldiers receive the weapons they need," Zelensky said.
"Otherwise, we will simply give the address of that person to our Armed Forces — our guys can call him and speak to him in their own language."
The standoff marks the latest escalation in tensions between Ukraine and Hungary, one of the EU's most Moscow-friendly governments, over disruptions to Russian oil transit.
The Druzhba pipeline, which supplies Russian crude to Hungary and Slovakia, has been offline since late January after a Russian strike damaged energy infrastructure in western Ukraine, according to Kyiv. Budapest and Bratislava accuse Ukraine of deliberately halting transit.
Hungary vetoed the EU's 20th sanctions package against Russia on Feb. 23 and also blocked the loan. A source familiar with Hungary's position told the Kyiv Independent that Budapest intends to maintain its stance until oil deliveries through Druzhba resume.
During the same briefing, Zelensky said he does not support restoring the pipeline.
"To be honest, I would not restore it. That is my position," he said, adding that he had communicated this view to European leaders and EU officials. "This is Russian oil."
The president argued that Ukraine should not prioritize supplying Russian crude while Russia continues its war. He added that technically the pipeline could be repaired within about six weeks.
Hungary and Slovakia, both landlocked countries, were the only EU members still receiving Russian crude via the pipeline's southern branch before the disruption. The route accounts for roughly 86–92% of Hungary's oil imports and nearly all of Slovakia's supply.
Orban's government has deepened energy ties with Moscow throughout the war while repeatedly obstructing EU sanctions on Russia or aid to Ukraine.
Budapest and Bratislava have called for a joint inspection of the damaged pipeline with EU participation, a proposal Zelensky said he would consider if formally requested.
Analysts link Orban's confrontational rhetoric toward Ukraine to Hungary's upcoming parliamentary elections in April. The ruling Fidesz party trails the opposition Tisza party in polls.
Peter Magyar, leader of Tisza, responded to the dispute by urging Zelensky to "withdraw" his remarks.
"No foreign state leader can threaten anyone, not a single Hungarian," he said. "Neither the outgoing Orban government nor the future Tisza government, not a single Hungarian."
Magyar called on the Ukrainian president to "clarify his words, and if he really said this, to withdraw them," and also to "report on the condition of the Druzhba oil pipeline."
"If possible, open it as soon as possible, start it up."
The Tisza party has condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine and signaled plans to reduce Hungary's dependence on Russian energy, while opposing arms deliveries from Hungary to Kyiv and rejecting fast-tracking Ukraine's EU accession.
The EU urged both Kyiv and Budapest to "dial down" their "inflammatory rhetoric," while calling Zelensky's remarks "not acceptable."
"There must not be threats against EU member states," European Commission spokesperson Olof Gill said on March 6.
Reporter
Tim Zadorozhnyy is the reporter for the Kyiv Independent, specializing in foreign policy, U.S.-Ukraine relations, and political developments across Europe and Russia. Based in Warsaw, he pursued studies in International Relations and European Studies at Lazarski University, through a program offered in partnership with Coventry University. Tim began his journalism career in Odesa in 2022, working as a reporter at a local television channel. After relocating to Warsaw, he spent a year and a half with the Belarusian independent media outlet NEXTA, initially as a news anchor and later as managing editor. Tim is fluent in English, Ukrainian, and Russian.
Hungarian government spokesperson Zoltan Kovacs confirmed that "all seven individuals will be expelled from Hungary."
"It doesn't matter to us what they have done in the past in the combat field," International Paralympic Committee President Andrew Parsons said.
The long-range drones hit the production workshops of the Yevpatoria Aircraft Repair Plant, located in western Crimea, as well as two Pantsir-S2 systems near a Russian military airfield in Dzhankoi, which sits in the peninsula's northeast, according to the SBU source.
Peter Magyar, the leader of the Tisza Party, urged EU leadership to "sever all ties with Ukraine until President Zelensky clarifies his words and apologizes to all Hungarian citizens for his statements."
One unnamed U.S. official described the support as "comprehensive," the Washington Post reported.
Since the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion, Ukrainian courts have convicted thousands of people of collaboration and treason. The Kyiv Independent's Kateryna Hodunova and Olena Zashko report from a penal colony in southeastern Ukraine that holds women who sided with Russia.
President Volodymyr Zelensky said on March 5 he hopes the blocking of a 90 billion euro ($107 billion) European Union loan for Ukraine by "one person" will end, warning that otherwise he could give that individual's address to Ukraine's military.
"We have stopped gasoline shipments to Ukraine, we are not delivering diesel either; we are still supplying electricity for now, and we will also stop the goods important to Ukraine that pass through Hungary," Orban said on Kossuth Radio.
The youngest freed serviceman is 26, captured at 22 in 2022, while the oldest is 60.
Among the reported targets were a Project 22460 patrol ship.
Ukrenergo told the Kyiv Independent that Ukraine resumed electricity exports on March 5 for the first time since November 2025.
President Donald Trump told CNN Friday that Iran's leadership has been “neutered” and that he's looking for new leadership that will treat the United States and Israel well, even if that's a religious leader and it's not a democratic state.
“Iran is not the same country it was a week ago. A week ago they were powerful, and now they've been indeed neutered,” he told CNN in a brief but wide-ranging phone interview.
In that call, he also said Cuba would fall “pretty soon” and emphasized the importance of voter ID legislation, which he suggested could be determinative in his Texas Senate endorsement.
Trump expressed confidence in the ease of picking a new leader in Iran — which he's said he must be involved in — and again compared the mission to Venezuela, where the US captured Nicolás Maduro earlier this year and put his deputy in power.
“It's gonna work very easily. It's going to work like did in Venezuela. We have a wonderful leader there. She's doing a fantastic job. And it's going to work Iike in Venezuela,” he said, referring to acting president Delcy Rodriguez.
Trump also said he was open to having a religious leader in Iran. “Well I may be yeah, I mean, it depends on who the person is. I don't mind religious leaders. I deal with a lot of religious leaders and they are fantastic,” he said.
And pressed on if he is insisting there needs to be a democratic state, Trump told CNN, “No, I'm saying there has to be a leader that's going be fair and just. Do a great job. Treat the United States and Israel well, and treat the other countries in the Middle East — they're all our partners.”
He went on to tout his relationship with those countries in the Middle East, claiming they're “fighting for us.”
“And I became very friendly with all those countries. That's why they're all fighting for us. Before I got involved, we didn't even speak to UAE and Saudi Arabia. You know, (President Joe) Biden shut out. Biden and (President Barack) Obama shut Saudi Arabia, UAE Qatar, he shut them all out. They were all going to go to China, and I got involved in very short period of time that became my friends,” Trump said.
And while the president praised the US operation against Iran — saying it's a “12, maybe 15 on the scale of 10” — he suggested he wasn't worried about rising gas prices.
“That's all right. It'll be short term time. It'll go way down very quickly,” he said, while dismissing that prices are up significantly and saying he's “already figured out” the Strait of Hormuz.
“We've knocked their Navy because, you know, when you knock out the Navy, they can't do what they wanted to be able to do. The Navy is almost, we just hit about the 25 mark. Can you imagine that? Big ones — 25 ships are down,” he said.
Trump separately told CNN that Cuba “is going to fall pretty soon.”
“Cuba is gonna fall pretty soon, by the way, unrelated, but Cuba is gonna fall too. They want to make a deal so badly,” he told Bash when touting US military success in his second term.
“They want to make a deal, and so I'm going to put Marco (Rubio) over there and we'll see how that works out. We're really focused on this one right now. We've got plenty of time, but Cuba's ready — after 50 years,” he added, explaining that Iran is the current priority.
He continued on Cuba: “I've been watching it for 50 years, and it's fallen right into my lap because of me, it's fallen, but it's nevertheless fallen right into the lap. And we're doing very well.”
A day earlier, Trump said at the White House that it's only a “question of time” before American Cubans can return to their home country, appearing to say that's next on the administration's agenda after the ongoing war with Iran.
“He's doing some job, and your next one is going to be, we want to do that special Cuba,” Trump said Thursday referring to his secretary of state. “He's waiting. But he says, ‘Let's get this one finished first.' We could do them all at the same time, but bad things happen. If you watch countries over the years, you do them all too fast, bad things happen. We're not going to let anything bad happen to this country.”
After the war with Iran, Trump said the next most important issue for his administration is passing voter ID legislation — and that it could be key to his endorsement in the contentious Texas Senate runoff.
Trump has said he'll soon make a choice between Sen. John Cornyn, the incumbent, and state Attorney General Ken Paxton, who's been pushing the SAVE America Act.
“I'm making a decision fairly shortly, but I want and then I feel very strongly that we have to have the full and complete SAVE America Act, OK? I want the SAVE America Act. It is more important than everything else we're working on other than the war,” he told Bash.
Trump suggested he needs assurances that both candidates would support the legislation.
“I've got to have the assurance of — you have a big story here come to think of it, but I'm just telling you — uh, I like John Cornyn, get along with him well. Get along with both of them very well. But we have go in with the SAVE America Act,” he said.
“We have to have voter ID. We have to have proof of citizenship. We have to have no mail-in ballots except the military, illness, disability and travel. We have to have no men in women's sports — I added two things, and we have to have no transgender operations for youth,” he added, reiterating two additional two demands that he posted on Truth Social Thursday.
In addition to requiring voter ID to vote in federal elections, the bill would mandate documentary proof of US citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.
Trump also repeated his demands that the Senate eliminate the filibuster to get the legislation passed.
“The Senate has to act on it. The House on it. And I don't want the watered down one — that doesn't mean anything. I want the one that just told you, five things,” he said.
Cornyn supports the bill but has refused to say whether he personally would vote to change Senate rules in order to pass it.
“There's not the votes in the Republican conference to change those rules,” he told CNN ahead of the primary.
Paxton said this week he would consider dropping out of the contentious runoff if Senate leaders agreed to gut the filibuster and pass the legislation.
“The Save America Act is the most important bill the U.S. Senate could ever pass, and I'm committed to helping President Trump get it done,” he wrote on X.
Cornyn shot back on X: “I repeat what I have consistently said: I support the bill and have encouraged Senate Republicans to get it done.”
This story has been updated with additional developments.
© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app on Google Play.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app from the Apple Store.
Experts say US influence over South American neighbour will be hard to replicate in country with deep and long-standing antipathy to the west
First, the CIA tracks the head of an oil-rich, US-baiting nation to a heavily guarded compound at the heart of his country's mountain-flanked capital.
Then, that leader is removed from power with a deadly and irresistible show of US military force.
Finally, a more pliant successor is installed to do Washington's bidding.
That was the recipe for Donald Trump's recent capture of Venezuela's regime. The country's president, Nicolás Maduro, was abducted in Caracas before dawn on 3 January.
After special forces seized Maduro, his vice-president, Delcy Rodríguez, stepped up with Trump's blessing, launching a once-unlikely, pro-US era for a South American country whose leaders had long railed against “Yankee” imperialism.
“I thank President Donald Trump for the kind willingness of his government to work together,” Rodríguez posted on X on Thursday, in perhaps her most unabashed act of genuflection since her ally's downfall.
Three months after Maduro's demise, Trump appears keen to replicate “regime capture” model in Iran after its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in Tehran during a devastating Israeli-US operation targeting his base.
“I have to be involved in the appointment [of his successor], like with Delcy in Venezuela,” Trump told the US news website Axios this week.
Speaking to the New York Times, he said: “What we did in Venezuela, I think, is … the perfect scenario.”
A state department official told the Wall Street Journal that Trump's strategy – “managing” a regime's behaviour from afar without putting US boots on the ground – might be called “decapitate and delegate”.
Yet South America and Middle East experts have serious doubts about whether what has so far worked in Caracas would work 7,000 miles away in Tehran.
“Turning Iran into a pliable kind of puppet regime is much less practical than in Venezuela where [even under Maduro] … the government was already inclined to work with the US, its historic partner for energy and the key player in the region,” said Benjamin Gedan, a former South America director on the national security council staff at the White House and now the director of the Stimson Center Latin America Program
He added: “This idea that after Venezuela the US could go around the world intervening and installing a Delcy Rodríguez figure wherever our aircraft carrier weighs anchor, it's a sort of silly idea.”
Iran experts believe Trump's demand to be involved in choosing the country's next leader is likely to be rejected out of hand by the country's surviving officials as brazen interference in their domestic politics. The country has bitter memories of meddling by outside powers, including Britain, Russia and the US.
To a large degree, the 1979 revolution that brought the Islamic regime to power was fuelled by nationalist resentment over perceived foreign intervention. The then reigning pro-western monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, was widely considered an American puppet.
Anti-Americanism, exemplified by the revolutionary chant “Marg bar Amrika” (Death to America), has been at the heart of the regime's ideology since the revolution's spiritual founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, branded the US “the great Satan”. Slogans and murals expressing antipathy to the US are prominent throughout Tehran and other Iranian cities.
Trump's insistence on being consulted seems even more far-fetched given that the countries have had no diplomatic relations for 46 years – a contrast with Venezuela, where the US had ties until as recently as 2019. US links with Iran were severed by the Carter administration in 1980 after revolutionaries stormed the US embassy in Tehran and held 52 American diplomats hostage.
Alex Vatanka, the head of the Iran programme at the Middle East Institute in Washington DC, called Trump's attempt to insert himself into Iran's choice of leader “beyond delusional” and questioned whether he had a workable plan to impose a Venezuela-type scenario.
“Regime change would have been much easier than converting existing Shia militant Islamists to the Maga movement, which is basically what he is asking for,” Vatanka said.
He added that outside influence was possible, due to individuals in “what's left of the inner circle of Khamenei” working with foreign intelligence services.
“But you still need to have a game plan,” he said.
“You need to decide who inside the regime you can work with. Then – together with that group – you either convince the others who are fighting right now to co-opt them, or you help the Americans kill them.
“That way someone can emerge as the top man and do what Rodríguez is doing in Venezuela … But I have seen nothing to suggest to me that that level thinking has gone into what the US is doing right now. They might decide to pull out, saying: ‘We killed Khamenei, there are no nukes left, the missile launchers are destroyed.'
“It's open warfare, and in such a situation, it becomes even harder for anyone who is left in the regime to want to suggest that they're willing to work with the US … They'll be killed before they get out of bed the following day.”
Naysan Rafati, senior Iran analyst at the thinktank International Crisis Group, said the US and surviving regime insiders may have a shared interest in continuity, but warned this could risk alienating the bulk of Iran's population, which is still angry over the bloody suppression of recent protests at a cost of thousands of lives.
“Even if the system has a shrinking base of ideological adherents, those adherents probably feel that this is the endgame if they don't band together. So you may have a rallying of the wagons,” he said.
“The neatest outcome for Washington is securing change within continuity – finding a partner that can quickly forge a critical mass of the Iranian system on terms the US can live with,” Rafati added.
“But that ambition faces two challenges: finding enough voices within the regime to accept change, and leaving many Iranians disaffected from continuity.”
Experts believe the real choice over Iran's next leader lies with the powerful Revolutionary Guards, which controls Iran's military policy as well as large swathes of the economy.
South America specialists believe Trump's apparent desire to repeat “the Delcy model” reflects his emboldenment at Washington's seemingly successful appropriation of the remnants of Maduro's authoritarian regime.
“You had no loss of aircraft, no loss of US service members, you got a government that had been portrayed to him at least as being implacably hostile, that's now very accommodating. You have a country with immense natural resources [that as Trump sees it] are newly available to the United States,” said Gedan.
But, the former White House adviser added, beyond the fact that Iran is much further away and better armed than Venezuela, it is far too early to tell whether Trump's gambit has even worked in South America.
“A year from now, if the US navy is not still sitting in the Caribbean, the Venezuelans, little by little, might feel like they have some breathing room all of a sudden and some autonomy again,” Gedan predicted.
The distraction of conflict in the Middle East might even benefit Maduro's successors as they seek to outlive Trump and extend their 27-year rule. “Their plan is not to be a puppet regime forever,” Gedan said. “Their plan is to hope the US moves on.”
Overcrowding, medical neglect and malnutrition are regular features of Camp East Montana in El Paso
Sign up for the Breaking News US newsletter email
Serious medical and mental health emergencies have been routine at the nation's largest Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) federal detention facility since its opening last summer, according to records obtained by the Associated Press.
Data and recordings from more than a hundred 911 calls at the Camp East Montana detention facility on the sprawling Fort Bliss army base in El Paso, Texas, along with interviews and court filings, offer a disturbing portrait of overcrowding, medical neglect, malnutrition and emotional distress.
Current and former detainees described a camp where about 3,000 people are obliged to live in loud and unsanitary quarters. They struggle to obtain healthcare as disease spreads, they lose weight because of a lack of food and fear security guards known to use force to put down disturbances, the people said.
“Every day felt like a week. Every week felt like a month. Every month felt like a year,” said Owen Ramsingh, a former property manager in Columbia, Missouri, who spent several weeks in the camp before his deportation in February to the Netherlands. “Camp East Montana was 1,000% worse than a prison,” he said.
A Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spokesperson who did not provide their name rejected claims of substandard conditions, saying Camp East Montana detainees receive food, water and medical treatment in a facility that is regularly cleaned.
The AP investigation found:
After its opening last August, staff at the camp made nearly one 911 call per day in its first five months of operation, according to records obtained of data covering 130 calls from the city of El Paso.
In one call, a man is heard sobbing after being assaulted by another detainee. In another, a doctor says a man is banging his head against the wall while expressing suicidal thoughts. In a third, a nurse says a pregnant woman is in severe pain and has the coronavirus.
Injured detainees ranged from a 19-year-old man who fell out of a bunk bed to a 79-year-old man struggling to breathe. At least 20 emergencies were reported as seizures, including some that resulted in serious head trauma.
The calls show traumatized detainees have repeatedly tried to harm themselves.
Two incidents have resulted in death. On 3 January 3, ICE said security guards responded after a 55-year-old Cuban man tried to harm himself and then used handcuffs and force to restrain him. A medical examiner ruled that Geraldo Lunas Campos's death was a homicide caused by asphyxia.
On 14 January, staff reported that a 36-year-old Nicaraguan man took his own life days after he was detained in Minnesota during the anti-immigration crackdown there. In addition to those cases, at least six other suicide attempts were reported, according to records from the city of El Paso.
The DHS spokesperson said the facility's staff “closely monitors at-risk detainees” and provides mental health treatment.
The Washington Post reported in September that a required ICE inspection found conditions at the facility violated at least 60 federal standards for immigration detention. But that report has never been released.
The Texas congresswoman Veronica Escobar has toured the camp several times and has repeatedly demanded its closure.
“This facility should not be operational. It feels like this contractor is reinventing the wheel, and people are losing their lives in their experiment,” she said.
She said the facility had temporarily cut its population to less than 1,900 when she visited last month and will be closed to visitors temporarily because of a measles outbreak.
On one visit, a female detainee showed Escobar a meager serving of scrambled eggs that was served still frozen in the middle. She learned detainees protested after they had stopped receiving juice, fruit and milk with their meals.
Escobar met with a detainee from Ecuador who said his arm had been broken during a violent arrest by immigration agents in Minnesota. Weeks later, the congresswoman could still see the fractured bones in his forearm poking up under the skin.
Escobar called for an investigation into contractor Acquisition Logistics LLC, which was awarded a contract worth up to $1.3bn to build and operate the camp.
“People should be moved by the abject cruelty, but if they're not, I hope they're moved by the fraud and corruption,” Escobar said.
Please disable the ad blocking feature.
To use this site, please disable the ad blocking feature and reload the page.
This website uses cookies to collect information about your visit for purposes such as showing you personalized ads and content, and analyzing our website traffic. By clicking “Accept all,” you will allow the use of these cookies.
Users accessing this site from EEA countries and UK are unable to view this site without your consent. We apologize for any inconvenience caused.
The Yomiuri Shimbun
22:35 JST, March 6, 2026
Japanese national team Samurai Japan won, 13-0, in its first game of the World Baseball Classic on Friday night at Tokyo Dome.
The Samurai Japan roster includes a record eight Major League Baseball players, including Shohei Ohtani of the Los Angeles Dodgers, who was named the MVP of the 2023 WBC.
Related Tags
Popular articles in the past 24 hours
Popular articles in the past week
Popular articles in the past month
JN ACCESS RANKING
The Japan News / Weekly Edition
Our weekly ePaper presents the most noteworthy recent topics in an exciting, readable fomat.
Read more
eng
jp
© 2026 The Japan News - by The Yomiuri Shimbun
MOSCOW, March 6. /TASS/. A lot can happen as the world recognizes Moscow as an irreplaceable energy supplier, Kirill Dmitriev, Russian special presidential envoy for investment and economic cooperation with foreign countries and director general of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), said.
"More to come as the world recognizes Russia as a must-have supplier of energy," he wrote on X in response to a post where a user described the US move to issue a license to allow Russian oil sales to India as a victory for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
According to earlier reports, the US Department of the Treasury issued a 30-day waiver to India to purchase Russian oil carried by tankers currently at sea, which also provides for petroleum product deals and supplies of crude loaded on vessels until March 5. US officials said the move was aimed at reducing pressure on the global oil market amid the US and Israeli military operation against Iran.
A spokesperson for the Indian Foreign Ministry said earlier that ensuring the energy security of the country's 1.4 billion-strong population was a top priority for its government. "Diversifying energy sourcing in keeping with objective market conditions and evolving international dynamics is at the core of our strategy," he noted, adding that "all of India's decisions are taken and will be taken with this in mind."
A staff member holds a sign showing a photo of U.S. President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein after a press conference to announce oversight efforts on Epstein files, in Washington on Feb. 26.BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images
The U.S. Justice Department released FBI records on Thursday that summarize interviews of an unidentified woman in which she made accusations against President Donald Trump related to an alleged sexual encounter.
FBI agents interviewed the woman four times in 2019 as part of their investigation into accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein. The Justice Department had previously released a log confirming that the interviews took place but released a summary of only one of those four meetings, in which she accused Epstein of molesting her when she was a teenager.
The newly disclosed records, which were posted on the department's website on Thursday, show she also claimed Trump attempted to force her to perform oral sex after Epstein introduced her to the future president in New York or New Jersey in the 1980s when she was between 13 and 15 years old.
White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said in a statement that the woman's claims are “completely baseless accusations, backed by zero credible evidence.”
U.S. House committee votes to subpoena Attorney-General Pam Bondi over Epstein files
The Justice Department has cautioned that some of the documents include “untrue and sensationalist claims made against President Trump.” Reuters could not independently confirm the accuracy of the woman's allegations, and FBI records suggest agents stopped speaking with her in 2019.
The Justice Department said in a post on the social media platform X that the records it released Thursday were among 15 documents that it had “incorrectly coded as duplicative” and not published as a result.
The disclosure comes as the Justice Department faces scrutiny in Congress over its handling of documents from the Epstein investigation, which it is required to make public.
Democrats have accused Trump's administration of concealing records related to Trump, and a committee in the House of Representatives voted to subpoena Attorney-General Pam Bondi so lawmakers can question her about how the government is handling the disclosures.
From Epstein to pizzagate and UFOs, here's what went down during the Clintons' depositions
Trump has said his association with Epstein ended in the mid-2000s and that he was never aware of the financier's sexual abuse.
Records previously released by the department show Trump flew several times on Epstein's plane in the 1990s, which Trump has denied. After the financier was first accused of sexual misconduct, Trump called the police chief in Palm Beach to say that “everyone has known he's been doing this,” according to an FBI interview record.
In the report of the woman's final interview, conducted in October 2019, during Trump's first presidency, agents asked whether she would be willing to provide more information about Trump.
In response, the agent wrote, she “asked what the point would be of providing the information at this point in her life when there was a strong possibility nothing could be done about it.”
Report an editorial error
Report a technical issue
Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.
© Copyright 2026 The Globe and Mail Inc. All rights reserved.
Andrew Saunders, President and CEO
US leader's remarks come hours after Iranian president claims some mediation efforts are under way
Middle East crisis – live updates
Donald Trump has demanded Iran's “unconditional surrender”, only hours after the country's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, claimed some mediation efforts to end the war were under way.
The US president's remarks on Friday hit European stock markets, which were already suffering after a warning from Qatar that a prolonged shutdown of gas production could drive oil to more than $150 a barrel. It was $90 on Friday.
Inside Iran, the main reformist group issued a statement urging the political elite to appoint a new supreme leader – following the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – who would signal Iran was willing to change course.
Trump's comments on social media appeared to undercut any return to diplomacy in the short term, indicating that the potential shocks to global energy markets were not prompting him to seek a settlement.
“There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” the US president wrote. “After that, and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.”
Pezeshkian said for the first time that some countries had begun mediation efforts to end the war with the US and Israel, without identifying those nations, adding that any talks should address those who started the war.
Qatar, Turkey, Egypt and Oman have all offered to mediate at some point since US and Israel launched joint strikes last Saturday. Two days ago, Iran's foreign ministry said it was a time for defence of the country, not for diplomacy.
Pezeshkian said in a post on X: “Some countries have begun mediation efforts. Let's be clear: we are committed to lasting peace in the region yet we have no hesitation in defending our nation's dignity and sovereignty. Mediation should address those who underestimated the Iranian people and ignited this conflict.”
The war began while Iran was involved in talks with the US about its nuclear programme. US and Israeli strikes last June also began while nuclear negotiations were taking place.
Recent statements from the US and Israel have given no indication of a willingness to come to the table anytime soon. Pete Hegseth, the US defence secretary, said late on Thursday that firepower over Iran was about to “surge dramatically”, while the Israel Defense Forces announced a new and intensified phase of the campaign on Friday morning.
At various points since the start of the war, Pezeshkian has said it is too late for Iran to negotiate. Overall, he has placed more emphasis on finding a new leadership for Iran in order to avoid a complete regime change, which is the preference of the Israelis.
Pezeshkian's remarks came as Iran's diminished alliance of reformist groups said Tehran should appoint a supreme leader who would both challenge US propaganda that Iran is a war-mongering country and reduce domestic polarisation.
The Reform Front, which helped Pezeshkian become president 18 months ago, suggested that attacks on non-military US assets in the region were diminishing global support for Iran as a victim of a blatant aggression, according to comments cited in a report by the Iranian newspaper Donya-e-Eqtesad.
“The election of a new leadership of the regime could convey a message of peace and friendship with the world, and thus strengthen anti-war protests on the global stage,” the Reform Front said, according to the report. “[It] should also convey the message of the beginning of a new era in Iran; an era that promises the participation of all political and civil tastes and tendencies in the governance of the country.”
An attempt by the regime to rely on only part of society to win the war would be a “very big and unforgivable mistake”, it added. The group did not identify its favoured candidate or name anyone it believes would hinder national unity. The choice of leader is made by the 88-strong assembly of experts. Currently the government is run by a temporary tripartite council.
Widespread reports suggest Trump opposes the idea of Ali Khamenei's son Mojtaba Khamenei succeeding him as supreme leader.
Releasing political prisoners and civil activists in a general amnesty was a necessity, the reformists said. They said in a war against an enemy possessing “the most advanced military and information technologies”, society could only remain resilient if there was national unity and cohesion.
Although reformists are a weakened force inside Iran, the criticism, expressed in the context of defending the homeland, is one of the few signs of an internal debate about how the country can end its international isolation, and whether the attacks on Gulf states will prove counterproductive.
There had been reports of a widespread release of prominent political prisoners, but later it was suggested the only prisoner who had been released was Ali Shakouri-Rad, a senior reformist politician. He was arrested last month a few days after a private meeting was leaked in which he accused security bodies of deliberately escalating and even staging violence including alleged killings among their own ranks to legitimise January's sweeping crackdown on protests. He is suffering medical issues.
The Reform Front, arguing that Iran needed to attract regional and global support and cooperation, said expanding retaliatory attacks would “remove Iran from the position of being oppressed and a victim of aggression, causing an inevitable reaction from the governments of the region and their joining the global consensus against Iran, and as a result, reducing our diplomatic capacity to end the war”.
It also called on “all components in Iranian society – whether Turks, Kurds, Lors, Arabs, Baluchis, Turkmens, Persians, etc to defend Iran's national identity, independence, and territorial integrity”.
The reformists added that opportunities were lost when recommendations from the pre-eminent reformist leader, Seyyed Mohammad Khatami, and the Reform Front itself last summer were not heeded.
While utterly condemning the US-Israeli aggression, the group also said Iran would be in a stronger position diplomatically and in terms of social cohesion if calls for the release of political prisoners had been heeded last summer after the 12-day war.
The Reform Front – whose leadership was the subject of recent mass arrests by the security services – said Israel's goal was chaos, civil war, and the disintegration of Iran.
Pezeshkian's son Yousef said the government needed to decide what it wanted its ideal postwar scenario to be as that would determine “the decisions taken, the operations we carry out and the words we say”.
He openly discussed the factors at play that would determine the outcome of the war, saying the key assessment was whether Iran's “endurance [will] be greater than [that of] the enemy”. This will rest in part on the issue of weapons stockpiles.
In the main, state-aligned Iranian TV and websites are focusing on the stated military successes of the security forces, or on civilian deaths, with little being broadcast about the damage being inflicted on Iranian missile launchers and security apparatus.
Please disable the ad blocking feature.
To use this site, please disable the ad blocking feature and reload the page.
This website uses cookies to collect information about your visit for purposes such as showing you personalized ads and content, and analyzing our website traffic. By clicking “Accept all,” you will allow the use of these cookies.
Users accessing this site from EEA countries and UK are unable to view this site without your consent. We apologize for any inconvenience caused.
The Yomiuri Shimbun
14:14 JST, March 6, 2026
Two regenerative medicine products made from induced pluripotent stem cells have been conditionally approved, the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry announced Friday. The approval comes with certain conditions and time limits.
This opens the door to the world's first commercialized treatment using iPS cells. Following national deliberations, a decision will be made on the price and whether it will be covered by public health insurance. The treatment could be available as early as this summer.
iPS cells can transform into various cell types and are created by introducing several genes into cells, such as those from the skin or blood.
Cuorips Inc., a startup out of the University of Osaka, has created a product called “RiHEART” that targets severe heart failure caused by ischemic cardiomyopathy. Cardiomyocytes made from iPS cells are processed into sheets. Three sheets are attached to the heart to promote blood vessel regeneration and restore cardiac function. Sales are expected to begin around this autumn.
Amchepry, a product from Sumitomo Pharma Co., targets Parkinson's disease. Transplanted nerve cells made from iPS cells into the patient's brain produce dopamine, which is expected to improve motor disorders such as tremors in the limbs and difficulty in walking. The company aims to start selling the product between summer and autumn this year.
Popular articles in the past 24 hours
Popular articles in the past week
Popular articles in the past month
JN ACCESS RANKING
The Japan News / Weekly Edition
Our weekly ePaper presents the most noteworthy recent topics in an exciting, readable fomat.
Read more
eng
jp
© 2026 The Japan News - by The Yomiuri Shimbun
Graves are prepared for the victims of a strike on a school in Minab, Iran on Monday.Iranian Foreign Media Department/Reuters
U.S. military investigators believe it is likely that U.S. forces were responsible for an apparent strike on an Iranian girls' school that killed scores of children on Saturday but have not yet reached a final conclusion or completed their investigation, two U.S. officials told Reuters.
Reuters was unable to determine more details about the investigation, including what evidence contributed to the tentative assessment, what type of munition was used, who was responsible or why the U.S. might have struck the school.
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday acknowledged the U.S. military was investigating the incident.
The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military matters, did not rule out the possibility that new evidence could emerge that absolves the U.S. of responsibility and points to another responsible party in the incident.
Reuters could not determine how much longer the investigation would last or what evidence U.S. investigators are seeking before the assessment can be completed.
Carney won't ‘rule out' Canadian military involvement in Middle East
The girls' school in Minab, in southern Iran, was hit on Saturday during the first day of U.S. and Israeli attacks on the country. Iran's ambassador to the U.N. in Geneva, Ali Bahreini, said the strike killed 150 students. Reuters could not independently confirm the death toll.
The Pentagon referred questions from Reuters to the U.S. military's Central Command, whose spokesperson, Captain Timothy Hawkins, said: “It would be inappropriate to comment given the incident is under investigation.”
The White House did not directly comment on the investigation, but press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to Reuters, “While the Department of War is currently investigating this matter, the Iranian regime targets civilians and children, not the United States of America.”
Asked about the incident during a news briefing on Wednesday, Hegseth said: “We're investigating that. We, of course, never target civilian targets. But we're taking a look and investigating that.”
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters on Monday that the United States would not deliberately target a school.
“The Department of War would be investigating that if that was our strike, and I would refer your question to them,” Rubio said.
Israeli and U.S. forces have until now divided their attacks in Iran both geographically and by target type, a senior Israeli official and a source with direct knowledge of the joint planning said. While Israel was striking missile launch sites in western Iran, the United States was attacking such targets, as well as naval ones, in the south.
The U.N. human rights office, without saying who it believed was responsible for the strike on the school, called on Tuesday for an investigation.
“The onus is on the forces that carried out the attack to investigate it,” U.N. human rights office spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani told a press briefing in Geneva.
Images of the girls' funeral on Tuesday were shown on Iranian state television. Their small coffins were draped with Iranian flags and passed from a truck across a large crowd towards the grave site.
Deliberately attacking a school or hospital or any other civilian structure would likely be a war crime under international humanitarian law.
If a U.S. role were to be confirmed, the strike would rank among the worst cases of civilian casualties in decades of U.S. conflicts in the Middle East.
Report an editorial error
Report a technical issue
Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.
© Copyright 2026 The Globe and Mail Inc. All rights reserved.
Andrew Saunders, President and CEO
EU ambassadors on March 5 pushed back against a proposal to fast-track Ukraine's entry into the European Union, rejecting a European Commission idea known as "reverse enlargement," Politico reported, citing undisclosed diplomatic sources.
The proposal would have allowed Ukraine to formally join the EU first and gradually receive full membership privileges afterward, in an effort to bring Kyiv into the bloc by 2027.
But diplomats said EU member states firmly opposed the idea during a meeting of ambassadors.
"It's done. Reverse enlargement is not going anywhere," one diplomat said, adding that the Commission will now have to reconsider the proposal.
Another senior diplomat criticized the idea for raising unrealistic expectations: "They have created false hopes. Now we have to correct that and tell them: actually, this reverse enlargement was dead on arrival," the diplomat said.
Several member states insisted the EU should continue following its traditional accession framework rather than altering the process for Ukraine. "We want to anchor Ukraine in the EU, but we cannot tear up our procedures and scrap the merit-based system," another diplomat said.
"The point is to find a realistic way forward," the diplomat added, referring to the need to balance political sensitivities among member states.
According to Politico, EU leaders are expected to reaffirm the bloc's standard, merit-based accession process at the upcoming European Council meeting of March 19, 2026, effectively shelving the Commission's proposal.
Still, Marta Kos, the EU's enlargement commissioner, defended calls for new thinking about expansion. She argued that the current model was "designed for a stable, rules-based world that no longer exists."
Ukraine has made EU membership a key element of its long-term security strategy and has raised the issue in discussions about a potential peace settlement. President Volodymyr Zelensky recently said he would not sign a peace agreement with the United States, Russia, and Europe if it did not include a specific date for Ukraine's EU accession.
In late January, Zelensky set 2027 as the target date for Ukraine's entry into the bloc. The timeline has drawn mixed reactions among EU member states, including both supporters and skeptics of Ukraine's path toward membership.
Ukraine applied to join the EU in February 2022, just days after Russia launched its full-scale invasion. Kyiv received candidate status later that year, and the EU formally opened accession talks in 2024.
North American news editor
Sonya Bandouil is a North American news editor for The Kyiv Independent. She previously worked in the fields of cybersecurity and translating, and she also edited for various journals in NYC.
Sonya has a Master's degree in Global Affairs from New York University, and a Bachelor's degree in Music from the University of Houston, in Texas.
Hungarian government spokesperson Zoltan Kovacs confirmed that "all seven individuals will be expelled from Hungary."
"It doesn't matter to us what they have done in the past in the combat field," International Paralympic Committee President Andrew Parsons said.
The long-range drones hit the production workshops of the Yevpatoria Aircraft Repair Plant, located in western Crimea, as well as two Pantsir-S2 systems near a Russian military airfield in Dzhankoi, which sits in the peninsula's northeast, according to the SBU source.
Peter Magyar, the leader of the Tisza Party, urged EU leadership to "sever all ties with Ukraine until President Zelensky clarifies his words and apologizes to all Hungarian citizens for his statements."
One unnamed U.S. official described the support as "comprehensive," the Washington Post reported.
Since the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion, Ukrainian courts have convicted thousands of people of collaboration and treason. The Kyiv Independent's Kateryna Hodunova and Olena Zashko report from a penal colony in southeastern Ukraine that holds women who sided with Russia.
President Volodymyr Zelensky said on March 5 he hopes the blocking of a 90 billion euro ($107 billion) European Union loan for Ukraine by "one person" will end, warning that otherwise he could give that individual's address to Ukraine's military.
"We have stopped gasoline shipments to Ukraine, we are not delivering diesel either; we are still supplying electricity for now, and we will also stop the goods important to Ukraine that pass through Hungary," Orban said on Kossuth Radio.
The youngest freed serviceman is 26, captured at 22 in 2022, while the oldest is 60.
Among the reported targets were a Project 22460 patrol ship.
Ukrenergo told the Kyiv Independent that Ukraine resumed electricity exports on March 5 for the first time since November 2025.
Please disable the ad blocking feature.
To use this site, please disable the ad blocking feature and reload the page.
This website uses cookies to collect information about your visit for purposes such as showing you personalized ads and content, and analyzing our website traffic. By clicking “Accept all,” you will allow the use of these cookies.
Users accessing this site from EEA countries and UK are unable to view this site without your consent. We apologize for any inconvenience caused.
The Associated Press
10:21 JST, March 6, 2026
Australia opened the World Baseball Classic by beating Taiwan 3-0 on Travis Bazzana's homer in the seventh inning and a two-run home run in the fifth by Robbie Perkins at the Tokyo Dome on Thursday.
Bazzana was the first pick in the 2024 MLB amateur draft and is expected to be in Triple A this season in the Cleveland Guardians organization.
“If you think of the two things I thought about most growing up it was, like, playing in the WBC and being in the Tokyo Dome cause we'd always come here — and playing the World Series and MLB. It's special,” Bazzana said.
Of course, his World Series dream is yet to come.
He also credited Perkins for getting Australia in front, removing some pressure.
“It makes slowing down the environment a touch easier when you have two runs already,” Bazzana said. “I was feeling good in the box and got a good pitch to hit.”
The two big swings were enough in a tight game dominated by pitching. Taiwan managed only three hits and Australia had seven.
It was a critical victory for Australia, which also won its first game in 2023, defeating South Korea en route to reaching the quarterfinals and a narrow 4-3 loss to Cuba.
Australian starter Alex Wells pitched three no-hit innings and Jack O'Loughlin negotiated the next three and allowed only two hits, setting the stage for the bullpen.
O'Loughlin got the victory with a save for Jon Kennedy. Po-Yu Chen was the losing pitcher.
Following Perkins' homer, Taiwan put two runners on in the sixth with two out but failed to score. The second to reach base was Chieh-hsien Chen who was hit by a pitch on the his right hand and left the game.
Australia loaded the bases in the bottom of the sixth and failed to score when Chris Burke popped out on the second pitch from reliever Yi Chang. Taiwan put two runners on in the top of the ninth and almost tied the game on a deep flyout by Lyle Lin.
South Korea hit four home runs and overpowered the Czech Republic 11-4 in Pool C in the day's second game at the Tokyo Dome.
Shay Whitcomb of the Houston Astros hit two home runs in back-to-back plate appearances, teammate Bo Gyeong Moon pounded a grand slam and Jahmai Jones of the Detroit Tigers added a solo shot in the eighth inning.
Moon's grand slam came in the first inning with one out that chased starter Daniel Padysak, who picked up the loss. Hyeong Jun So got the victory.
Whitcomb hit a solo home run in the third and added a two-run homer in the fifth.
The Czech Republic's Terrin Vavra connected on a three-run homer in the fifth off Woo Joo Jeong to narrow the lead to 6-3, only to be overshadowed by Whitcomb's second homer in the bottom of the inning.
Vavra played a handful of games for the Baltimore Orioles, the only Czech player with MLB experience.
South Korea is deep in major league talent led by the Los Angeles Dodgers infielder Hyeseong Kim and the San Francisco Giants outfielder Jung Hoo Lee.
South Korea is trying to advance from the pool stage in the WBC after three straight failures.
On Friday in Pool C, Australia faces the Czech Republic and Japan plays Taiwan.
The top two teams in the group advance to the quarterfinals in the United States, joining the top two in the other three groups.
Popular articles in the past 24 hours
Popular articles in the past week
Popular articles in the past month
JN ACCESS RANKING
The Japan News / Weekly Edition
Our weekly ePaper presents the most noteworthy recent topics in an exciting, readable fomat.
Read more
eng
jp
© 2026 The Japan News - by The Yomiuri Shimbun
WASHINGTON, March 6. /TASS/. US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent confirmed reports that his authority had issued a 30-day license to India to buy Russian oil carried by tankers currently at sea.
"To enable oil to keep flowing into the global market, the Treasury Department is issuing a temporary 30-day waiver to allow Indian refiners to purchase Russian oil," he wrote on the X social network.
"This deliberately short-term measure will not provide significant financial benefit to the Russian government as it only authorizes transactions involving oil already stranded at sea," he continued.
The US official added that the US anticipated that New Delhi will ramp up its purchases of US oil.
The general license, published by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) also permits deals involving Russian oil derivatives and allows buying products that were loaded on any vessels before or on March 5.
It permits "offloading of crude oil or petroleum products of Russian Federation origin loaded on any vessel, including vessels blocked under the above listed authorities." This applies to products loaded on tankers before 12:01 a.m. eastern standard time (5:00 p.m. GMT), March 5. Such operations are allowed until April 4.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
An explosion was heard and large plumes of smoke were seen rising in Beirut's southern suburbs on Friday after Israeli airstrikes pounded the capitals of Iran and Lebanon as the U.S. apparently struck an Iranian drone carrier at sea, intensifying its campaign targeting the Islamic Republic's fleet of warships.
The Israeli military released a video that it said showed a strike on a bunker that allegedly belonged to Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei on Friday, days after his death.
The U.S. military said early Friday that an Iranian drone carrier was attacked and set ablaze. The message from the U.S. military's Central Command showed black-and-white footage of the carrier ablaze after multiple strikes hit it.
Traffic was gridlocked in Lebanon's capital on Thursday as panicked residents tried to flee after Israel's military ordered people from all of Beirut's southern suburbs to evacuate, apparently signaling plans for a major bombardment of the area.
Smoke rises following an Israeli airstrike in Dahiyeh, Beirut's southern suburbs, in Beirut, Lebanon, Friday, March 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)
Iranians attend Friday prayers in the courtyard of the Imam Khomeini Grand mosque in Tehran, Iran, Friday, March 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
Israeli soldiers work on tanks at a staging area in northern Israel near the border with Lebanon, Friday, March 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Ariel Schalit)
Shiite Muslims shout slogans as they burn effigies of President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during a protest against the killing of Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in Budgam, northeast of Srinagar, Indian controlled Kashmir, Friday, March 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Dar Yasin)
Women hold Iranian flags and pictures of the late Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei as government supporters march against the ongoing U.S.-Israeli military campaign after Friday prayers at the Imam Khomeini Grand mosque in Tehran, Iran, Friday, March 6, 2026. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi)
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday appeared to rule out talks with Iran absent its “unconditional surrender.” Israeli warplanes bombed Beirut and Tehran as Iran launched more retaliatory strikes against Israel and Gulf countries on the seventh day of the war.
The strikes in Lebanon were the heaviest since a 2024 ceasefire ended the last war between Israel and the Iran-backed Hezbollah, who fired rockets at Israel in the opening days of the war now underway. More than 95,000 people have fled Beirut's suburbs and southern Lebanon after sweeping Israeli evacuation warnings.
The U.S. and Israel have battered Iran with strikes, targeting their military capabilities, leadership and nuclear program. The stated goals and timelines for the war have repeatedly shifted, as the U.S. has at times suggested it seeks to topple Iran's government or elevate new leadership from within.
The war has escalated to affect more than a dozen countries across the Middle East. London police said Friday that four men have been arrested on suspicion of aiding Iran by spying on the Jewish community. Iran has been linked to previous attacks abroad on Iranian dissidents, Israelis and Jewish targets.
Qatar's energy minister warned that the war could “bring down the economies of the world,” predicting a widespread shutdown of Gulf energy exports that could send oil to $150 a barrel. Saad al-Kaabi told the Financial Times newspaper that even if the war ended immediately it could take “weeks to months” to resume normal exports after an Iranian drone strike on Qatar's largest liquefied natural gas plant earlier in the war.
AP correspondent Ben Thomas reports President Trump is weighing in on Iran's political future as the U.S. military continues pounding its forces.
In a social media post on Friday, Trump said that after Iran's surrender, “and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s),” that the U.S. and its allies would help rebuild Iran, making it “economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before.”
Those comments were likely to raise further questions about the endgame of the war launched a week ago by the United States and Israel. The war has killed at least 1,230 people in Iran, more than 200 in Lebanon and around a dozen in Israel, according to officials in those countries. Six U.S. troops have been killed.
Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on social media that “some countries” had begun mediation efforts in the conflict, without elaborating.
On Thursday, Trump urged the Iranian people to “help take back your country,” promising the U.S. would grant them “immunity,” without elaborating.
Trump also told media outlets that he should be involved in choosing a replacement for Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in the opening strikes of the war. Trump spoke dismissively of Khamenei's son, Mojtaba Khamenei — a front-runner to replace his father — calling him “a lightweight.”
Iranian state television reported Friday that a leadership council had started discussing how to convene the country's Assembly of Experts, which will select the new supreme leader.
Buildings associated with the 88-member clerical panel, have been attacked during the Israeli-American air campaign. Israel has said it would target the next supreme leader if he poses a threat.
Israel's military said Friday it had launched “a broad-scale wave of strikes” on Tehran, Iran's capital, and that over the past week it has heavily bombed an extensive underground bunker that Iran's leaders had planned to use during the hostilities.
Witnesses described Israeli airstrikes as particularly intense, shaking homes in the area and sending columns of smoke rising. Others reported explosions around the Iranian city of Kermanshah, an area that is home to multiple missile bases. They spoke anonymously for fear of retribution.
Iran meanwhile launched missile and drone attacks at Israel, as well as Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, all countries that host U.S. forces. There were no immediate reports of casualties.
The U.S. military said early Friday that it struck an Iranian drone carrier, setting it ablaze.
The U.S. military's Central Command released black-and-white footage of the burning carrier. The Iranian military did not immediately acknowledge the attack.
The drone carrier, the IRIS Shahid Bagheri, is a converted container ship with a 180-meter-long (197 yard) runway for drones. The vessel can travel without refueling in port for a distance greater than the Earth's circumference, reports said at the time of its 2025 inauguration.
Earlier in the week, an American submarine sank an Iranian frigate off the coast of Sri Lanka as it was returning from an exercise hosted by the Indian navy that the U.S. also joined. Sri Lanka's navy rescued 32 crew members and recovered 87 bodies.
Countries across the Gulf said they intercepted Iranian missiles and drones on Friday, including attacks aimed at U.S. bases. Strikes have killed at least 15 civilians, including in Oman, Kuwait, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates.
Qatar and Saudi Arabia said Friday they intercepted projectiles headed toward U.S. bases. Air raid sirens sounded in Bahrain, where the Interior Ministry said Iranian strikes hit two hotels and a residential building, though no casualties were reported.
The United Arab Emirates and Kuwait — where six U.S. soldiers were killed Sunday — also reported missiles and drones breaching their airspace.
In Israel, the sound of explosions could be heard in Tel Aviv throughout Friday after warnings about missiles incoming from Iran, as air defense systems worked to intercept the barrage. Five soldiers have been wounded in the fighting with Hezbollah, Israel's military said.
Israel has carried out waves of airstrikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut, where Hezbollah has a large presence but which is also home to hundreds of thousands of civilians. Lebanon's Health Ministry said 217 people had been killed by Israeli strikes since Monday and 798 wounded.
Roads in the Lebanese capital were choked with evacuating traffic as smoke rose over the city's southern districts. Two hospitals evacuated patients and staff.
“What can we do? We prayed here under the tree. During the night we slept in the car because there is no place to stay,” Jihan Shehadeh, one of the tens of thousands of displaced, said.
One Israeli strike hit near the Iranian embassy in Beirut, according to Lebanon's state-run National News Agency. Israel's military did not immediately respond to questions about the report.
Hezbollah's military command on Friday urged its fighters not to relent and to “defend the nation,” casting the escalating war in religious terms and calling on them to “kill them wherever you find them.”
Lebanon's Prime Minister Nawaf Salam slammed both Israel and Hezbollah, saying the Lebanese state and people “did not choose this war.”
___
Metz reported from Ramallah, West Bank, Rising from Bangkok and Abou AlJoud from Beirut. Seung Min Kim in Washington, Geir Moulson in Berlin, and Malak Harb, Abby Sewell and Bassem Mroue in Beirut contributed.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG.
Gov. JB Pritzker dismissed a call from former D.C. police officer Michael Fanone, who was injured during the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, for Americans to use Second Amendment rights to protect themselves from ICE, who he said was "lawless."
An appeals court struck down a local law in the District of Columbia that banned gun magazines containing more than 10 bullets, describing the measure as unconstitutional.
The ruling Thursday from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals also reversed the conviction of Tyree Benson, who was taken into custody in 2022 for being in possession of a handgun with a magazine that could contain 30 bullets, according to The New York Times.
"Magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition are ubiquitous in our country, numbering in the hundreds of millions, accounting for about half of the magazines in the hands of our citizenry, and they come standard with the most popular firearms sold in America today," Judge Joshua Deahl wrote on behalf of the two-judge majority in the three-judge panel.
"Because these magazines are arms in common and ubiquitous use by law-abiding citizens across this country, we agree with Benson and the United States that the District's outright ban on them violates the Second Amendment," he added.
A salesperson holds a high capacity magazine for an AR-15 rifle at a store in Orem, Utah, in March 2021. (George Frey/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
"This appeal presents a Second Amendment challenge to the District's ban on firearm magazines capable of holding ‘more than 10 rounds of ammunition.' Appellant Tyree Benson argues that ban contravenes the Second Amendment so that his conviction for violating it should be vacated," Deahl also wrote. "The United States, which prosecuted Benson in the underlying case and defended the ban's constitutionality in the initial round of appellate briefing, now concedes that this ban violates the Second Amendment. The District of Columbia, which is also a party to this appeal, continues to defend the constitutionality of its ban."
"We therefore reverse Benson's conviction for violating the District's magazine capacity ban. And because Benson could not have registered, procured a license to carry, or lawfully possessed ammunition for his firearm given that it was equipped with a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds, we likewise reverse his convictions for possession of an unregistered firearm, carrying a pistol without a license, and unlawful possession of ammunition," Deahl said.
Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby, the judge who dissented, wrote that, "The majority bases its common usage analysis on ownership statistics that show only that magazines holding 11, 15, or 17 rounds of ammunition are in common use."
GUN RIGHTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY DEBATED AT SUPREME COURT
Magazines at Norm's Gun & Ammo shop in Biddeford, Maine, in April 2013. From left, the first two are high capacity magazines for handguns, an AK-47 magazine, an AR-15 magazine and an SKS magazine. (Shawn Patrick Ouellette/Portland Press Herald via Getty Images)
"The majority, however, fails to contend with the reality that these statistics do not support the conclusion that the particularly lethal 30-round magazine, such as the one Mr. Benson possessed here, is in common use for self-defense. It simply is not," she added.
The District of Columbia can now appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, or ask the local appeals court to take another look at the ruling with a larger panel of judges, according to the Times.
High-capacity rifle magazines are removed from a display at Freddie Bear Sports in January 2023 in Tinley Park, Illinois. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The newspaper also reported that in a previous case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the constitutionality of the local law surrounding gun magazine sizes. It's unclear how the two rulings will interact.
Greg Norman is a reporter at Fox News Digital.
Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more Fox News politics content.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and
agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can
opt-out at any time.
Subscribed
You've successfully subscribed to this newsletter!
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by
Factset. Powered and implemented by
FactSet Digital Solutions.
Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by
LSEG.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Authorities say Britney Spears was pulled over, after reports that her BMW was driving fast and erratically, on a highway Wednesday night and jailed after taking a series of field sobriety tests. (March 6)
Britney Spears arrives at the Los Angeles premiere of “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood,” on July 22, 2019. (Photo by Jordan Strauss/Invision/AP, File)
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Britney Spears was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs near her Southern California home and released, authorities said. A statement from Spears' representative calls the arrest “inexcusable.”
The California Highway Patrol said officers received a report shortly before 9 p.m. Wednesday that someone in a black BMW 430i was driving fast and erratically on U.S. 101 in Newbury Park, California in Ventura County near the Los Angeles County line.
The 44-year-old pop star, the only person in the car, exited the freeway and pulled over, a CHP statement said. She appeared to be impaired, took a series of field sobriety tests, was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of a combination of alcohol and drugs and was taken to a Ventura County jail, the CHP said. Chemical test results are pending and the case remains under investigation.
Spears was booked early Thursday morning and released at about 6 a.m., according to jail records.
“This was an unfortunate incident that is completely inexcusable,” a statement from a Spears representative said. “Britney is going to take the right steps and comply with the law and hopefully this can be the first step in long overdue change that needs to occur in Britney's life. Hopefully, she can get the help and support she needs during this difficult time.”
The Ventura County District Attorney's Office will determine whether charges will be filed. Spears has a May 4 court date scheduled.
The arrest was a few miles from Thousand Oaks, California where Spears has a home. The CHP listed her as living in nearby Westlake Village.
Born in Mississippi and raised in Louisiana, Spears was a teen pop phenomenon who became a defining superstar of the '90s and 2000s. She rose to fame from Disney Channel's “The Mickey Mouse Club” to MTV and beyond, with such era-defining hits like “ … Baby One More Time,” “Oops! … I Did It Again” and “Toxic.”
A pop icon has been arrested. AP correspondent Mike Hempen reports.
Most of her albums have been certified platinum, according to the Recording Industry Association of America, with two diamond titles: 1999's “ … Baby One More Time” and 2000s “Oops! … I Did It Again.” Her last full-length album, “Glory,” was released in 2016.
Spears became a focus of tabloids in the early 2000s, and a source of public scrutiny, as she battled mental illness and paparazzi documented the details of her private life.
Later, as cultural opinion evolved to recognize the misogynistic media coverage of the time, Spears' fight to control her life became the focus of the #FreeBritney movement.
In 2008, Spears was placed under a court-ordered conservatorship, run primarily by her father and his lawyers, that would control her personal and financial decisions for well over a decade. It was dissolved in 2021. Two years later, she released a bestselling, tell-all memoir, “The Woman in Me.”
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Sri Lanka has released video showing its navy personnel rescuing Iranian sailors from a warship that was sunk by a torpedo from a U.S. submarine on Wednesday. (Produced by Elaine Carroll)
Two Iranian sailors, carrying green bags, who were rescued from IRIS Dena warship by Sri Lanka's navy are escorted to a Judicial Medical Officer from the National Hospital, in Galle, Sri Lanka, Thursday, March 5, 2026. (AP Photo/Eranga Jayawardena)
Two Iranian sailors, center, who were rescued from IRIS Dena warship by Sri Lanka's navy are escorted to a Judicial Medical Officer from the National Hospital, in Galle, Sri Lanka, Thursday, March 5, 2026. (AP Photo/Eranga Jayawardena)
Iranian sailors, wearing t-shirts, who were rescued from IRIS Dena warship by Sri Lanka's navy, are escorted to a Judicial Medical Officer from the National Hospital, in Galle, Sri Lanka, Thursday, March 5, 2026. (AP Photo/Eranga Jayawardena)
Iranian warship IRIS Dena is seen in the Bay of Bengal during International Fleet Review held at Visakhapatnam, India, Feb. 18, 2026. (AP Photo)
COLOMBO, Sri Lanka (AP) — Sri Lanka transferred more than 200 sailors from an Iranian naval vessel to shore Friday after it sought assistance while anchored outside the country's waters, as tensions mounted in the Indian Ocean following the sinking of an Iranian warship by a U.S. submarine.
Sri Lankan navy spokesperson Cmdr. Buddhika Sampath said 204 sailors of the IRIS Bushehr were brought to Welisara Naval Base near the capital, Colombo. They underwent border control procedures and medical tests, but none were found to have health issues.
About 15 others have been left aboard the ship with Sri Lankan naval personnel for assistance because they had reported a fault with the ship. The Iranian sailors are interpreting operational instructions, manuals and logs for their Sri Lankan counterparts. He said the ship will be taken to the port of Trincomalee in eastern Sri Lanka, and remain in Sri Lankan custody until further notice.
The Sri Lankan government took custody of the Bushehr after the U.S. sank an Iranian warship, the IRIS Dena, off Sri Lanka's coast Wednesday. The strike marked one of the rare instances since World War II in which a submarine sank a surface warship, and highlighted the expanding scope of the U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran.
The Dena had participated in naval exercises hosted by India before heading into international waters on its way home. At least 74 countries had joined the events, according to India's Defense Ministry, including the U.S. Navy, which conducted reconnaissance aircraft and maritime patrol drills.
The Indian navy received a distress signal from the Dena but by the time it launched a search and rescue operation, the Sri Lankan navy had already begun its own rescue efforts, the ministry said.
The Sri Lankan navy rescued 32 sailors and recovered 87 bodies.
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the Dena had been carrying “almost 130” crew. The normal crew size for a warship of that class is 140. Araghchi called the sinking an “atrocity at sea” and said the US would “bitterly regret” the attack.
Sri Lankan President Anura Kumara Dissanayake said late Thursday that authorities decided to take control of the IRIS Bushehr after discussions with Iranian officials and the ship's captain, after one of its engines failed.
“We have to understand that this is not an ordinary situation. It's a request by a ship belonging to one party to enter into our port. We have to consider that according to the international treaties and conventions,” he told journalists Thursday night.
Separately on Friday, he wrote on X: “No civilian should die in wars. Our approach is that every single life is as precious as our own.”
The IRIS Bushehr had been described in previous Iranian media reports as a navy logistics ship equipped with a helicopter pad.
Dissanayake said Sri Lanka was guided by neutrality while seeking to uphold humanitarian principles.
“We have followed a very clear stance. We will not be biased to any state nor we will be submissive to any state,” he said.
The broadening Middle East conflict is putting strategically located Sri Lanka in a delicate position as it tries to balance humanitarian obligations, international maritime law and its longstanding policy of non-alignment.
H.M.G.S. Palihakkara, Sri Lanka's retired former foreign secretary who also served as its permanent representative to the United Nations, said the country had acted responsibly and impartially.
“There has been a distress call from the ship. So naturally Sri Lanka, as a party to the Law of Sea and The Hague Convention, had no option but to do what it did by mounting a humanitarian operation to provide assistance to save lives and provide medical care to the affected,” he said.
Palihakkara said parties to the conflict would understand that Sri Lanka was not taking sides.
“You could not have ignored the distress call. Even the attacking powers cannot leave shipwrecked sailors dying. That is the law,” Palihakkara said.
Katsuya Yamamoto, director of the Strategy and Deterrence Program at the Sasakawa Peace Foundation in Tokyo, said Sri Lanka, which is not at war with either the U.S. or Iran, is considered a neutral state. As such, the Bushehr can enter a Sri Lankan port if granted permission by the government, he said.
Yamamoto said that once the vessel is docked, it falls under Iranian jurisdiction, leaving Sri Lankan authorities without legal grounds to inspect it unless Colombo decides to side with the U.S.
The U.N. resident coordinator in Sri Lanka, Marc-André Franche, welcomed Sri Lanka's intervention, saying on X that it reflected its commitment to “multilateralism, maintaining neutrality, and underscoring its dedication to peace.”
Australia's government confirmed on Friday that three Australians were aboard the submarine that sank the IRIS Dena. The Australians were there as part of the trilateral U.S., Australian and British training program under the AUKUS security pact.
The Australian government has maintained it was not warned that the U.S and Israel planned to attack Iran. Australia has not commented on the legality of the attack, but supports the objective of preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons.
Neil James, executive director of the Australian Defense Association policy think tank, said it is “reasonably rare” for Australians embedded with another nation's military to go to war against a country such as Iran that Australia wasn't at war with.
He said an Australian would not have fired the torpedo that sank the Iranian ship
“The Australians wouldn't have a job where they had to push the button on the torpedo because the captain of the boat gives the order and someone else, perhaps the weapons officer, presses the button but they're not going to be Australian,” James said.
___
Saaliq reported from New Delhi. Associated Press writers Krishan Francis in Colombo, Sri Lanka, Rod McGuirk in Melbourne, Australia and Mari Yamaguchi in Tokyo contributed to this report.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Markets
Hot Stocks
Fear & Greed Index
Latest Market News
Hot Stocks
Every reporter in Israel — and every member of the public — is subject to a military censor. On national security grounds, the regulation authorizes the censor to prohibit reporting or broadcasting any material that could reveal sensitive information or pose a threat to the country's security interests.
This is particularly sensitive during wartime, where the military censor has made clear that broadcasting any images that reveal the location of interceptor missiles or military sites hit by enemy projectiles is forbidden, especially in live broadcasts.
The general order of the Chief Censor from 1988 states that “every person who prints or publishes printed matter or a publication concerning state security… must submit it to the censor before printing or publishing it.” The order clarified a regulation that has existed since Israel's founding.
Crucially, it does not give the censor any editorial control over CNN's coverage at all. It does allow them to make sure no sensitive information is unintentionally revealed. CNN has been transparent about this process when we go through it.
Israel is not the only country that puts restrictions on news media in times of war. In Ukraine, a country under martial law since Russia's full-scale invasion four years ago, there are strict rules about reporting a withdrawal by Ukrainian troops, for instance, or details of any significant movement of armor or weapons towards the front-line.
Normally, the international media would only deal with the censor on embeds with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Reporting teams would shoot video and allow the censor to review the footage before it airs, a standard practice for embeds with other militaries as well. CNN has reached agreements with the US military before joining missions or seeing certain training exercises.
However, the rules have tightened in this war.
There's no doubt that the Israeli public has posted videos of missile intercepts and more during this war. A quick search of social media and Telegram channels reveals plenty of these videos. But the censor focuses more on the international media, and it has tightened the restrictions since the war began.
After the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched thousands of rockets at Israel, there was no problem showing intercepts in the skies over southern and central Israel. Now the censor has prohibited live broadcasts showing the interception of Iranian ballistic missiles, even as the vast majority have been stopped.
To be clear, international news networks don't submit every piece of video to the military censor for review. Far from it. CNN has not submitted any video to the censor for review since the war started on Saturday morning. But the censor does prohibit us from putting out live broadcasts of intercepts that could reveal the accuracy of Iranian ballistic missiles or the location of interceptor missile arrays.
Israeli far-right Minister of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir has turned the apolitical military censor into a talking point, vowing to “act with severity and zero tolerance” against international media that violate the censorship rules.
In a joint statement with the Minister of Communications, Ben Gvir said police have been dispatched to several locations as “suspects have been detained, incidents investigated, and even arrests made in cases where suspicion arise of violating the guidelines.”
“Anyone who endangers Israel's citizens in the name of ‘journalistic reporting' will face a determined and tough police force,” Ben Gvir said. “No concessions, no games.”
Most stock quote data provided by BATS. US market indices are shown in real time, except for the S&P 500 which is refreshed every two minutes. All times are ET. Factset: FactSet Research Systems Inc. All rights reserved. Chicago Mercantile: Certain market data is the property of Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. and its licensors. All rights reserved. Dow Jones: The Dow Jones branded indices are proprietary to and are calculated, distributed and marketed by DJI Opco, a subsidiary of S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC and have been licensed for use to S&P Opco, LLC and CNN. Standard & Poor's and S&P are registered trademarks of Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC and Dow Jones is a registered trademark of Dow Jones Trademark Holdings LLC. All content of the Dow Jones branded indices Copyright S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC and/or its affiliates. Fair value provided by IndexArb.com. Market holidays and trading hours provided by Copp Clark Limited.
© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app on Google Play.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app from the Apple Store.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG.
Brantley Gilbert told Fox News Digital his three kids are homeschooled and learn 'what kids need to know.'
Country star Brantley Gilbert has built a life for himself on his South Georgia farm and does everything in his power not to leave it.
During an interview with Fox News Digital, Gilbert — who recently became an investor and equity partner of Real American Beer to create a non-alcoholic beer called RAB ZERO – explained that living remotely on a farm allows him to disconnect from the online world. He also explained that checking social media takes "so much" from his kids.
The country star revealed that his three are homeschooled and learn "what kids need to know and not so much what, you know, certain people in this world feel like they'd like them to know."
Brantley Gilbert rarely leaves his South Georgia farm. (Getty Images)
"I'm kind of — when I come off the road, like, these shows and being out here on the road is my 'wild and crazy' now," Gilbert began, noting that he is 14 years sober.
"I get back home, I don't really leave the farm. I'm not — and this is probably not a great thing to say for what I do for a living, but man, I don't live on social media. I actually barely ever look at it," he continued. "Just as a husband and a father of three, you know, between that and the music business, I don't really have enough time and enough effort to put into something that could take so much away from them."
Brantley shared that now that his tour is over, he really only leaves his farm to go to church or go to ball games.
"Just as a husband and a father of three, you know, between that and the music business, I don't really have enough time and enough effort to put into something that could take so much away from them."
"And outside of that, man, I don't really leave the farm much," he said.
An average day on Gilbert's farm could have its own TV show, according to the country music star.
RILEY GREEN CHOOSES ALABAMA FARM OVER NASHVILLE FAME DESPITE HAVING 'EVERY REASON' TO MAKE THE MOVE
Gilbert explained that his father and brother both work on his farm while his wife Amber runs a hybrid homeschooling group. The couple's kids, Barrett and Braylen, are enrolled at the school and attend three days a week.
Amber shared some information about the academy on Instagram in 2023, explaining that she never considered homeschooling her kids until 2020.
They wanted structure, socialization, and a Christian education for their kids, while also having concerns about public school exposure and strict attendance policies that wouldn't accommodate touring. After learning about hybrid homeschooling from friends at Turning Point USA, she visited Learn Upstate Hybrid Academy in Anderson, SC, and found it to be a refreshing solution she highly recommends.
WATCH: COUNTRY STAR BRANTLEY GILBERT REVEALS HIS KIDS ARE HOMESCHOOLED ON GEORGIA FARM
"She actually started a school three years ago. It's like a homeschool school – teaching kids what kids need to know and not so much what, you know, certain people in this world feel like they'd like them to know. It's a really important thing, so I try to help out there where I can. I believe she's doing something extremely important there," Gilbert said.
"So, they call Mondays and Fridays 'work days' and those are their two favorite days of the week," Gilbert said of his two oldest kids. "You know, my brother and my dad come pick them up, and they wake up, and they're out the door a million miles an hour, and they actually have them working. And they get to play, but they have to work first."
Gilbert said this tradition was instilled into him by his grandfather and now his father has done a "pretty good job" of passing it on to his kids.
Brantley Gilbert and his wife, Amber Cochran Gilbert, first met in high school. (Emma McIntyre/Getty Images)
Aside from country music and family, Gilbert decided to partner with Real American Beer to create a non-alcoholic beer called RAB ZERO. Gilbert told Fox News Digital that he was always a fan of Hulk Hogan (the founder of Real American Beer) and when the opportunity presented itself for the country star to become an investor, he couldn't pass it up.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER
"Growing up, I thought Hulk Hogan was the second coming. And I'll never forget, having Hulk Hogan text my phone and texting back and forth with him. Dude, I don't know that I've ever been starstruck until that moment," Gilbert said.
WATCH: BRANTLEY GILBERT SAYS HIS HULK HOGAN FANDOM PROMPTED HIM TO BE AN INVESTOR IN REAL AMERICAN BEER AND CREATE A NON-ALCOHOLIC BEER CALLED RAB ZERO
APP USERS CLICK HERE
A post shared by Amber Cochran Gilbert (@ambercochrangilbert)
Gilbert told Fox News Digital that cutting out alcohol was absolutely essential for him to become a father.
LIKE WHAT YOU'RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS
"I don't know that I could have been a dad. I definitely couldn't have been the kind of dad that I want to be and try to be on a daily basis. I'm sure there would have been an adjustment in life and I would have prioritized that, but man, I'll be completely honest, had I not got that out of my life, I don't think I would have been a dad. I wouldn't have been a husband," he explained.
WATCH: BRANTLEY GILBERT SHARES DAY-TO-DAY ON HIS FARM
Gilbert continued, "That's the greatest, scariest, most important job I've ever had is being a dad. My wife coming back in the picture making that possible. I'll forever be thankful. I don't think I ever see any of that if I had not made that lifestyle choice."
Brantley Gilbert performed during the 2014 CMA Festival. (C Flanigan/FilmMagic)
Brantley and Amber met in their hometown in Georgia and dated in high school. The pair were off and on during their teen years and then broke up for about five years. They reconnected, tied the knot in 2015 and have three kids: son Barrett, daughter Braylen and son Abram.
Brantley Gilbert, Multi-Platinum Country Rock Powerhouse, Becomes Investor and Equity Partner of Real American Beer and Launches RAB ZERO - Non-Alcoholic Beer That Still Hits. RAB ZERO delivers full-flavor American beer energy without the alcohol, with $1 per case supporting U.S. service members and their families through a new USO partnership.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Janelle Ash is an entertainment writer for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to janelle.ash@fox.com.
Get a daily look at the top news in music, movies, television and more in the entertainment industry.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and
agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can
opt-out at any time.
Subscribed
You've successfully subscribed to this newsletter!
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by
Factset. Powered and implemented by
FactSet Digital Solutions.
Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by
LSEG.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG.
Los Angeles Chargers QB Justin Herbert joins Colin Cowherd to discuss the Chargers' 3-0 start, working under Jim Harbaugh, and preview the matchup between Oregon and Penn State.
Los Angeles Chargers quarterback Justin Herbert gushed over 27-year-old singer Madison Beer in a heartfelt birthday tribute on social media, offering fans a rare glimpse into the couple's relationship.
The two-time Pro Bowl quarterback, who normally shies away from the public eye, posted a series of photos to his Instagram Stories on Thursday.
Justin Herbert of the Los Angeles Chargers warms up prior to a game against the Philadelphia Eagles at SoFi Stadium on Dec. 8, 2025 in Inglewood, California. (Katelyn Mulcahy/Getty Images)
"Happy birthday to my favorite person of all time," Herbert wrote in a post that showed the couple on the sidelines of one of his NFL games. "I love you so much. You've changed my life forever."
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM
In another photo appearing to show the couple out to dinner, Herbert wrote, "I am the luckiest guy alive…"
Herbert, who turns 28 later this month, shared another photo of the "Make You Mine" artist petting goats and captioned the photo, "My goats."
The couple was first linked together in August when they were spotted together on the set of one of Beer's music videos in Los Angeles. Herbert and Beer were photographed in October on the sidelines of a Chargers game at SoFi Stadium, seemingly confirming the dating rumors.
Quarterback Justin Herbert of the Los Angeles Chargers and singer Madison Beer attend an NBA game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Minnesota Timberwolves at Crypto.com Arena in Los Angeles, California, on Oct. 24, 2025. (Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images)
The same month, Herbert went viral after blocking a rogue basketball from hitting Beer when the two sat courtside at a Los Angeles Lakers game.
Herbert signed a five-year, $262.5 million extension with the Chargers in July 2023. Despite proving himself to be one of the elite young quarterbacks in the NFL, Los Angeles' offensive struggles have seen the team fall short in back-to-back playoff appearances.
Quarterback Justin Herbert (10) of the Los Angeles Chargers blocks a basketball from hitting Madison Beer as they attend a basketball game between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Minnesota Timberwolves at Crypto.com Arena in Los Angeles, California, on Oct. 24, 2025. (Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The team's offensive coordinator, Greg Roman, was fired in January and replaced with former Miami Dolphins head coach Mike McDaniel, who is regarded as one of the top offensive minds in football.
Follow Fox News Digital's sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
Paulina Dedaj is a Sports Editor for Fox News Digital.
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and
agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can
opt-out at any time.
Subscribed
You've successfully subscribed to this newsletter!
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by
Factset. Powered and implemented by
FactSet Digital Solutions.
Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by
LSEG.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG.
Indiana restaurateur Ed Schwartzman shares the details about his newest menu item, revealing how smashed beef, melted cheese, grilled onions and an unconventional protein choice came together after hands-on testing with Fernando and Alberto Mendoza.
Americans are getting saucy — and restaurants are taking notice of customers' latest condiment cravings, according to recent food industry reports.
The trend taps into a deep love of dipping. Half of Americans say they always or often add condiments to their food — while 90% are open to trying new sauces and spreads, recent consumer surveys reveal.
Many Americans are even bringing their own sauces into restaurants.
One in five say they sometimes carry sauces from home when they go out — most commonly ketchup, hot sauce or mayonnaise — according to a February YouGov survey. At home, 93% of people say they have at least one condiment on hand, while more than a quarter keep more than 10 stocked at a time.
Signature sauces are helping drive a 132% year-over-year increase in demand for elevated food experiences in the U.S., according to Griffith Foods' 2026 Food & Flavor Outlook. The report found that 90% of consumers are open to trying new condiments, as interest in bold, "maximalist" flavors continues to rise, including sweet, umami and smoky profiles.
"Sauces are often the easiest way for people to explore new tastes without feeling like they're stepping too far outside their comfort zone," Eleni Louca, head chef of Hello Haloumi, a bakery café in New York City, told Fox News Digital.
Half of Americans say they always add condiments as restaurants turn sauces into the main attraction. Some even bring their own sauces into restaurants. (iStock)
"People today want to interact with their food more and play with flavor instead of eating something just one way."
Louca added, "In my opinion, condiments are one of the most underrated parts of food. A good sauce can completely change a dish."
BUFFETS MAKE OLD-SCHOOL COMEBACK AS AMERICANS HUNT FOR DINING VALUE: 'FINANCIAL GENIUS'
Peanut butter, honey and salsa top the list of Americans' most-loved condiments, new research has found, with barbecue sauce, chocolate sauce, ketchup, maple syrup, jam or jelly, ranch dressing and mayonnaise also ranking among the favorites.
Among the least liked are fish sauce, hot sauce and relish. Steak sauce and Thousand Island dressing garnered the most neutral feelings.
Peanut butter, honey and salsa top the list of Americans' most-loved condiments, a new survey found. (iStock)
These offerings especially appeal to younger consumers seeking "adventure in flavors," while giving operators built-in opportunities for social media-friendly presentations and upselling. That's according to the 2026 Hospitality Trends Report from af&co., a San Francisco-based hospitality marketing and public relations agency, and Carbonate, a hospitality-focused creative agency in Ohio.
Restaurants are also embracing flight-style formats beyond sauces, serving multiple variations of the same dish or drink, from pasta and martini flights to cinnamon roll trios, to meet diners' appetites for variety and customization, the report found.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR LIFESTYLE NEWSLETTER
"Flights tap into a very real shift in diner behavior — people want discovery without commitment," Candace MacDonald, Cincinnati-based co-founder of Carbonate, told Fox News Digital. "A sauce flight delivers that perfectly."
In the South, where Duke's Mayo has a devoted following and barbecue sauce debates are common, the focus on condiments is not surprising. Restaurants from Nashville to South Carolina and Texas are leaning into the trend, Southern Living recently reported.
Americans stockpile sauces at home and even bring them out to eat, surveys have found. (iStock)
At Sho Pizza Bar in Nashville, diners can pair pies with a trio of dips, including miso ranch and Calabrian chili honey, according to the outlet.
In Greenville, South Carolina, Keipi's Georgian fries come with a house-made condiment flight featuring exotic sauces such as adjika and satsebeli.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE LIFESTYLE STORIES
And at Spare Birdie Public House in Texas, guests can choose a three-dip sampler ranging from guacamole to queso and hummus.
Thanks to social media and global travel trends, Americans are becoming more adventurous about trying new flavors, said Sanwar Mal Khokhar, a mixologist and bar manager at Sanjh, a high-end Indian restaurant in Texas.
Condiment flights may be trending in the U.S. — but global cuisines have long led the way. (iStock)
In Indian cuisine, sauces and chutneys are an essential part of the meal, especially with appetizers, Khokar told Fox News Digital.
"Mango chutney, tamarind sauce, mint-coriander chutney and yogurt-based sauces are all designed to balance spice, acidity, sweetness and freshness," he said. "Each creates a different flavor experience."
TEST YOURSELF WITH OUR LATEST LIFESTYLE QUIZ
He added, "In many ways, what American restaurants call condiment flights has existed in Indian food culture for generations."
They also add a creative touch and some variety without complicating things in the kitchen, Khokar pointed out.
Chefs say a good sauce can transform a dish as the condiment trend heats up nationwide. (iStock)
"From a business perspective, sauces are very smart," Louca agreed.
"They don't cost much to produce, but they add personality to a dish and make it more memorable."
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The appeal of condiment flights is not limited to restaurants.
The concept is easy to recreate at home and is perfect for game day, brunch or a cookout or a cookout, with pairings such as waffles with multiple syrups, chicken wings served with a trio of sauces, or soft pretzels with everything from beer cheese to French onion dip, according to Southern Living.
Deirdre Bardolf is a lifestyle writer with Fox News Digital.
A look at the top-trending stories in food, relationships, great outdoors and more.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and
agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can
opt-out at any time.
Subscribed
You've successfully subscribed to this newsletter!
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by
Factset. Powered and implemented by
FactSet Digital Solutions.
Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by
LSEG.
Eva Mendes and Ryan Gosling made their first official appearance together in public in more than a decade on Thursday night, when the “Barbie” star surprised his partner for her 52nd birthday.
Gosling had Mendes brought onstage during the filming of “The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon” so that the audience could sing “Happy Birthday,” led by a high school marching band.
Gosling was on the show to promote his new film, “Project Hail Mary,” in which he plays a middle school teacher who wakes up on a spaceship and with no memory. In honor of the film's theme, the actor had filled the audience with school teachers.
Mendes had “no idea” this was going to happen, Fallon said. Looking nonplussed as she came onto the stage, she gave an impromptu speech to the audience of teachers, having to lean into the host's microphone.
“We owe so much to you guys,” she said, “and you're so underpaid!” — prompting laughter from the audience.
Earlier, Gosling revealed that Mendes “loves teachers” and even displays her Hall Monitor sash in their home.
Hollywood Minute: Ryan Gosling sets out to save the world in his new film
Fallon brought out New Jersey's North Bergen High School marching band, who carried a flag declaring “Happy Birthday, Eva!”
Mendes and Gosling reportedly met while filming the thriller “The Place Beyond the Pines” in 2011, and they now have two daughters. Despite their status as Hollywood A-listers, the couple have mostly kept their relationship and family life out of the public eye.
At the 2024 Oscars, before his performance of the song “I'm Just Ken” from Greta Gerwig's “Barbie,” Gosling walked the red carpet with his mom, stepdad and sister. Mendes stayed backstage.
Earlier in the show, Gosling told Fallon about the influence of one of his teachers, who, he said, “really flipped things around for me.” She ran a reading competition for the students, and Gosling got second place.
Eva Mendes opens up about her acting hiatus after having kids with Ryan Gosling
“I've never read that many books in my life,” he said.
He also revealed that, when the teacher left the school, Gosling attempted to reenact the famous “O Captain! My Captain!” scene from the 1989 film “Dead Poets Society.”
“I stood on my desk and I was crying, and I said ‘O Captain! My Captain!'” he recounted, “and no one got the reference. I don't even think she got the reference.”
At the end of the show, Fallon revealed that the entire audience would be going to a screening of “Project Hail Mary.”
© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app on Google Play.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app from the Apple Store.
When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can't do it on our own.
We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?
The Iran war shows yet again that US oil is still vulnerable to foreign shocks.
The United States has been chasing the rhetorical goal of energy independence — the ability to produce enough domestic energy to be essentially free of dependence on imports — since the energy crisis of the 1970s exposed the country's reliance on Mideast oil. President Donald Trump has put his own spin on the idea, pushing beyond independence to “energy dominance.”
If you look just at oil extraction, the US seems to have succeeded. Thanks to the fracking revolution, it is now the largest oil producer in the world, and it exports more petroleum and other liquid fuels than it imports. The US is, in fact, a dominant player in the global energy market.
But as the US and Israel's attacks on Iran this week have revealed, being dominant in energy isn't the same thing as being independent. What you're paying at the pump now is directly connected to what's happening 6,000 miles away. Because of attacks on shipping and oil infrastructure, gasoline prices are rising across the country, reaching an average of $3.25. The last time prices jumped this high this fast was in March 2022, when Russia launched its full invasion of Ukraine. Even Trump was forced to awkwardly acknowledge the reality.
“So if we have a little high oil prices for a little while, but as soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop, I believe lower than even before,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday. Trump has also tasked his Cabinet to look for any way they can to keep gasoline prices down.
One sign of the rising danger is that Trump also said on his social media platform that the US would offer political risk insurance for shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and possibly naval escorts, particularly for oil tankers, after transits drastically slowed. Twenty percent of the world's petroleum consumption and 20 percent of natural gas flows through the Strait of Hormuz. Iran itself is the world's fifth-largest oil producer, and its oil facilities are under attack. It's now launching its own strikes on oil tankers. We've seen shocks to the global oil and gas sector before, but this is the big one.
“We're living through the geopolitical nightmare for markets,” said Sam Ori, executive director of the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago. “This is the crisis that has kept people up at night.”
And with the route throttled, Americans are likely to see even higher gasoline prices in the weeks to come. For most Americans, gasoline is their single-highest energy expense, averaging $2,930 per household in 2024. Adjusting for inflation, the US has been blessed with fairly steady gasoline prices over the decades, so a big, sudden price spike will hit households hard.
All of which raises the question: If the US is producing more oil than ever, how are we still vulnerable to supply shocks occurring half a world away?
It sounds straightforward in its wording, but energy independence has always been an ill-defined, unachievable goal, no matter how many presidents invoke it. Depending on who you ask, it means reaching self-sufficiency in energy production or immunity from foreign turmoil. But even if the US sourced every drop of oil we use from within our borders, we would still be vulnerable to international price shocks for one simple fact: Oil is a globally traded commodity. Its price is set not by how much the US extracts at home, but by the international laws of supply and demand.
”A disruption in the flow of oil anywhere affects prices everywhere,” Ori said. “No matter how much oil you produce, no country is insulated from the volatility of the global oil market.”
Then what about Trump's favorite term: “energy dominance”? This is similarly vague, somewhere in between deregulating the domestic energy sector to encourage more oil and gas extraction and a strategic doctrine to wield energy exports, particularly natural gas, for diplomatic leverage. The vast quantities of oil and gas the US has unlocked with the shale boom “changes how geopolitical oil price shocks abroad are transmitted to the U.S. economy, but not the fact that they will have an impact,” said Lutz Kilian, director of the Center for Energy and the Economy at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, in an email.
While the US is the biggest oil producer, it's still less than a quarter of the global total. We can't drill our way to meaningfully cheaper gasoline and can't make up for what's lost when the Strait of Hormuz gets blocked. “If the Strait is not operational, there is no way in hell the US can replace that,” said Samantha Gross, director of the Energy Security and Climate Initiative at the Brookings Institution.
But markets are only one factor hobbling energy independence. For one thing, not all oil coming out of the ground is the same, and crude oil has to be refined before it's of any use. US refineries along the Gulf Coast are mostly set up to process heavier oils we import rather than the lighter oil we extract domestically, mainly through fracking. That lighter crude tends to be more valuable to export than consume at home. The US is set up to be a giant, well-oiled cog in a global machine rather than a stand-alone contraption.
If a foreign oil supplier gets cut off, the US has more oil reserves it can tap, but it can take months to years to ramp up production. The US does have the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the world's largest supply of emergency crude oil. The Biden administration tapped it to keep gasoline prices down after Russia launched its full invasion of Ukraine. But the reserve is only meant to replace oil imports for 90 days, and it's currently at less than 60 percent capacity.
“Every president gets crap when they use it because folks come out and say, ‘Oh, that was political, and he's just trying to lower gasoline prices.' Well, yeah,” Gross said. “Although it is kind of odd to release SPR oil for a conflict we caused.”
And while the US is the world's largest oil producer, it's also the world's largest consumer — with appetites only set to grow as more Americans take to the roads and skies while fuel efficiency regulations get weaker.
The net result is that the shale boom has changed “how geopolitical oil price shocks abroad are transmitted to the U.S. economy, but not the fact that they will have an impact,” said Lutz Kilian, in an email. “Energy independence is not possible except in autarky,” an imagined scenario where the US is completely self-sufficient while also isolated from global trade.
So is energy independence a worthwhile goal, even in theory?
“No, it's not,” Ori said. “I don't think ‘energy independence' is a useful concept at all.”
It may not sound as good, but a better goalpost than “energy independence” is “energy security,” ensuring an uninterrupted flow of hydrocarbons and electrons at an affordable price. And that requires both strong domestic production and secure sources from abroad. “To really maximize energy security, you want to minimize the way that volatility can affect your economy,” Ori said. That means building durable relationships with trading partners. It also means reducing our dependence on all oil, mainly in the transportation sector.
Unlike past crises, the oil price spikes from the US attacks on Iran are a problem of our own making. At the same time, the Trump administration is rolling back fuel economy regulations for cars and trucks and repealing incentives for electric vehicles that would have otherwise helped limit demand. But Trump is instead working to increase fossil fuel production and consumption on all fronts.
Just how bad will things get? Global oil markets are currently well supplied, so there's a lot of crude already on the move or in storage that's cushioning the blow. Future prices will depend on how long war-driven disruptions go on and how much alternative capacity emerges. There are other shipping routes for oil and pipelines across countries like Saudi Arabia that could absorb some of the capacity. Kilian said that higher fuel prices could also have a muted effect on inflation. “The effect of a one-time energy price shock on U.S. headline inflation tends to be short-lived, even when the energy price remains elevated,” he wrote.
But we're in an unprecedented situation, and we have yet to see the full economic and energy impacts of the war. It's clear that record oil production can't shield against supply disruption, and the next conflagration may not be on the US's terms. When that happens, we will need some help from our friends, or we will all pay for it.
Understand the world with a daily explainer, plus the most compelling stories of the day.
This is the title for the native ad
Our coasts are more vulnerable than we realized.
How scientists (and the rest of us) are finding 16,000 new species a month.
Around the world, energy is becoming abundant — there's just one problem.
New research reveals which food crops are razing the rainforest. One comes out way ahead — and it's an American favorite.
Cows are draining the Colorado River.
Skimo enters the Winter Olympics at the most tragic time.
This is the title for the native ad
© 2026 Vox Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG.
Israel Defense Forces arrive in southern Lebanon, Wednesday, as thousands flee fighting with Iranian-backed proxy terrorist group, Hezbollah. (Credit: IDF)
Amid the ongoing conflict with Iran, analysts say the Trump administration should pressure Lebanon to fulfill its commitments to disarm the Iran-backed terrorist group as it drags the country into another war with Israel.
David Schenker, a former U.S. assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs who oversaw Lebanon's policy during the first Trump administration and now directs the Program on Arab Politics at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said: "The U.S. should make clear to Lebanon that it is time for the state to honor its ceasefire commitment to disarm Hezbollah," he told Fox News Digital. Schenker warned if Beirut "doesn't pursue disarmament, it will remain a failed state."
The warning comes as the IDF attacked multiple Hezbollah targets Friday in response to the terror group's launching of rockets and drones toward Israel on March 2, its first attack since a November 2024 ceasefire ended the previous round of fighting.
Smoke billows following strikes on Beirut's southern suburbs, following an escalation between Hezbollah and Israel amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, as seen from Baabda, Lebanon, March 5, 2026. (Mohamed Azakir/Reuters)
Since the first day of the renewed fighting, the IDF has carried out over 200 strikes across Lebanon targeting Hezbollah's military, media and financial infrastructure, as well as operatives from the group and affiliated networks, according to a March 5 analysis by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies' Long War Journal. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz also threatened Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem.
The renewed fighting has exposed deep tensions inside Lebanon's government, which in recent days called on Hezbollah to disarm and ordered security agencies to prevent attacks on Israel from Lebanese territory.
IRAN COULD ‘ACTIVATE' HEZBOLLAH IF US TARGETS REGIME, TRUMP'S INNER CIRCLE TO DECIDE: EXPERT
Smoke rises after Israeli strikes in Lebanon, following an escalation between Hezbollah and Israel amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, as seen from Marjayoun, Lebanon, March 5, 2026. (Karamallah Daher/Reuters)
Schenker says the move reflects frustration in Beirut rather than a fundamental policy shift. "The Government of Lebanon's latest cabinet vote on Hezbollah disarmament is nothing new," Schenker said. "It is a reiteration of the cabinet decision last August mandating the disarmament of Hezbollah. The language is perhaps more strident, but the message is the same."
"It is a reflection of the Government's frustration and desperation over Hezbollah dragging Lebanon into yet another war with Israel," he added. "It also reflects the Lebanese Armed Forces' failure to date to take its mission of disarmament seriously."
Hezbollah's latest attacks appear to have caught Lebanese officials off guard. Reports suggest the group had previously assured officials it would not intervene in a broader regional conflict tied to Iran.
Schenker said the episode underscores a longstanding reality in Lebanon's political system. "The government of Lebanon has never tried to control Hezbollah," he said. "The few months that the LAF devoted to disarmament in south Lebanon was performed with Hezbollah's consent and coordinated with the militia."
Still, public frustration inside Lebanon may be shifting the political environment. "Given the population's growing anger toward Hezbollah now, the political environment should be more conducive for the LAF to confront Hezbollah," Schenker said.
ON MADURO'S ‘TERROR ISLAND,' HEZBOLLAH OPERATIVES MOVE IN AS TOURISTS DRIFT OUT
Iran rebuilds Hezbollah ties as Trump gives a 10-15 day deadline. (Fadel Itani/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
"The fear of ‘civil war'—i.e., Hezbollah perpetrating violence against the Government—remains," he added. "But increasingly, Lebanese prefer taking that risk and possibly gaining sovereignty than being in a state of perpetual war with Israel."
In a clip posted on X by the Center for Peace Communications, Lebanese people angrily responded to Hezbollah's actions with one man telling Jusoor News: "If Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem wants to commit suicide, let him go do it in Tehran, not Lebanon."
According to David Daoud, senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Hezbollah's decision to attack Israel despite the ceasefire reflects the group's willingness to escalate the conflict even as Lebanon's government seeks to avoid another war.
The crisis has also drawn international attention. French President Emmanuel Macron called for urgent steps to prevent Lebanon from sliding deeper into war.
"Everything must be done to prevent this country, so close to France, from once again being drawn into war," Macron wrote in a statement posted on X on March 5 after speaking with Donald Trump, Benjamin Netanyahu and Lebanese leaders.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun (R) meets with U.S. President Donald Trump's Deputy Special Representative for the Middle East, Morgan Ortagus (L) at the Baabda Palace in Beirut, Lebanon, on Feb. 7, 2025. (Photo by Lebanese Presidency / Handout/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Macron said Hezbollah "must immediately cease its fire toward Israel," while urging Israel to avoid expanding military operations inside Lebanon.
For now, analysts say the outcome may depend on whether Lebanon's government is willing to confront Hezbollah directly or continue to tolerate Iran's terror proxy that has long operated outside the control of the government's control.
Efrat Lachter is a foreign correspondent for Fox News Digital covering international affairs and the United Nations. Follow her on X @efratlachter. Stories can be sent to efrat.lachter@fox.com.
Fox News' Antisemitism Exposed" newsletter brings you stories on the rising anti-Jewish prejudice across the U.S. and the world."
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and
agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can
opt-out at any time.
Subscribed
You've successfully subscribed to this newsletter!
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by
Factset. Powered and implemented by
FactSet Digital Solutions.
Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by
LSEG.
Americans are owed $39.2 billion by the federal government, according to a Treasury Department tabulation. These funds are in the form of mature, unredeemed savings bonds that individuals bought but have not claimed.
Most of these bonds date to the 1980s, when investors eagerly snatched up bonds carrying annual interest rates topping out at 9%. But some were issued as far back as World War II.
Individuals do not claim bonds for a host of reasons. In some instances, they simply forget because the bond may not be redeemed for 10, 20, or even 30 years. In other cases, the bond owner may have misplaced their paper certificate and not realized they can still get their payout. Other bondholders have died before cashing in, and their heirs are unaware that they are entitled to stake a claim.
The situation is lamentable because the only party to benefit is the government. United States savings bonds, notes Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), are “not like a regular bond where you get quarterly interest payments. You give your money to the Federal Government. The Federal Government takes your name and address. You get a piece of paper. And at the end of however long of a bond you buy — say, 20 years — you get back your principal, plus interest.”
More than six years ago, Rep. Ron Estes (R-KS), a former Kansas state treasurer, introduced legislation to help reconnect savings bond holders and other rightful claimants. His proposal directed the Treasury to transfer data on who owned what unclaimed bonds to states, which would then use their unclaimed property processes to locate bondholders. When the bondholder or rightful claimant cannot be found, a state can pocket the funds.
The bill stalled, but Congress did appropriate $50 million over two years to fund the Treasury's effort to digitize its old bond records, which would help connect bonds and bondholders and their heirs.
Undeterred, Estes reintroduced his bill in 2021, which garnered 36 cosponsors. Kennedy introduced companion legislation in the Senate, which 29 other senators supported. Republicans and Democrats alike supported the Unclaimed Savings Bond Act of 2021, but it was not voted on in either chamber.
Congress seemed to have solved the matter the next year, when Kennedy added a provision to a larger piece of legislation that directed the Secretary of the Treasury to “provide each State, in digital or other electronic form” information on bondholders within their states. The law also stated that any state receiving this information was permitted to use it pursuant to its abandoned property, or “escheatment,” policies.
The hopes of Estes, Kennedy, and other policymakers were dashed in October 2023. Citing concerns about the privacy of U.S. bondholders, the administration of then-President Joe Biden proposed a regulation that would make it very difficult for states to use the Treasury's bondholder data.
Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), who had taken an interest in the matter, was irate. The rule, he wrote in a letter to the Administration, “would frustrate congressional intent.” He fumed that “During World War II, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, the federal government aggressively marketed U.S. savings bond purchases as both an act of patriotism and a smart long-term savings opportunity.”
State officials also blasted the proposed rule. An official from Nebraska's unclaimed property office complained, “The proposed rule, as it stands, may result in a cumbersome and convoluted procedure that could deter states and bond owners from active participation.” Maryland's comptroller agreed, “Under the proposed rule, it will be very challenging to promptly and accurately identify bond owners and facilitate the rightful return of funds.”
The Treasury Department mostly waved away these concerns when it adopted the final rule. The present policy does not appear to be eroding the financial value of old bonds. Bureau of the Fiscal Service reports pegged the value of unclaimed bonds at $29.9 billion in 2021, $35.4 billion in late 2022, and $39.2 billion today.
Kennedy has expressed hope that the new crop of Treasury officials brought in by President Donald Trump will straighten things out.
“[W]e are almost home. What now we have to do is get the state treasurers to sign an agreement with the U.S. Department of the Treasury,” Kennedy said.
Rep. Estes agrees and has asked the president to issue an executive order waiving the existing regulation and directing the Treasury to get these bonds off their books.
OPINION: NATO 3.0 IS HERE, AND THAT'S A GOOD THING
“The next step right now is to have the Treasury come up with a process for working with state treasurers to turn over the data… and let the normal state escheatment process work,” Estes said in an interview.
The lawmaking and regulatory wrangling have been long and difficult, Estes observed, but it has been worth it because the objective is good: “I want to see people get their money back.”
Kevin R. Kosar (@kevinrkosar) is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and edits UnderstandingCongress.org.
The fight for control of the US Senate is now officially underway after primaries in Texas and North Carolina delivered the first clues for Democrats and Republicans as they prepare for an eight-month march to the November midterm elections.
Democrats see some encouraging signs in Tuesday's results about the energy in the party. Turnout in the Texas Democratic primary hit record levels for a midterm year, with more than 2.3 million ballots cast — second only to the 2008 cycle, when there was a presidential contest.
In the North Carolina primary, Democratic former Gov. Roy Cooper easily clinched the Senate nomination, receiving more than 750,000 votes — compared with about 625,000 for the entire GOP field. Those numbers align with CNN polling that shows Democrats are far more motivated to vote in the midterms than Republicans, despite having dismal views of their party leaders.
Beyond the energy edge, Democrats also stand to benefit from the clarity that came from both primaries, with Cooper and state Rep. James Talarico emerging as the party's nominees. While former Republican National Committee chairman Michael Whatley won the GOP Senate primary in the Tar Heel State, the party must contend with the added uncertainty and cost of a 12-week runoff in Texas between incumbent Sen. John Cornyn and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.
Republicans are also grappling with other signs of a challenging political environment, with recent CNN polling showing President Donald Trump's approval rating hitting a new low with independents as the American public increasingly questions his priorities and signals doubt that his proposals will help the country.
While the economy and cost of living remain top concerns for voters, the war with Iran could emerge as a flashpoint in the midterms. Nearly 6 in 10 Americans disapprove of the US decision to take military action in Iran, according to a CNN poll fielded shortly after the start of the attacks. Trump's advisers are mindful of the political risks of a prolonged conflict, which has already sparked some backlash from voices in the MAGA universe.
The GOP still has the Senate math and map in its favor, with Democrats needing to gain four seats to win the majority — and several of their best opportunities resting in deeply Republican turf.
Here's a look at where the key Senate races stand eight months from Election Day:
There weren't any surprises Tuesday in North Carolina, which is home to one of the marquee battleground Senate races of the cycle. From Texas to Capitol Hill, Republicans are waiting to see what Trump decides in the Senate runoff — and when — with a March 18 deadline for candidates to remove their names from the May ballot.
While their matchup was formally set on Tuesday, Cooper and Whatley had been treating the North Carolina Senate race like a general election contest for some time.
The results are what strategists had long expected. Cooper, a top Democratic recruit for the cycle, received more than 90% of the vote in his primary. Whatley, who is running with Trump's endorsement, got about 65% of the vote on the Republican side — a potential sign of work to do with GOP voters heading into the fall campaign.
North Carolina is crucial to the Democratic Party's hopes of winning the majority, and Democrats see Cooper as having a strong profile to help the party win a Senate seat here for the first time since 2008.
Whatley, in turn, is leaning in to his ties to Trump, who won North Carolina during all three of his presidential bids. In his victory speech Tuesday, Whatley pitched himself as “a conservative champion for North Carolina who will be an ally for President Trump.”
What happens with the Republican runoff in Texas stands to have a dramatic effect in shaping the direction of the race this fall. And Trump is poised to play a decisive role in steering the outcome.
After staying neutral during the primary, the president announced Wednesday he would endorse either Cornyn or Paxton “soon” and would call on the other candidate to exit the race. Top Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune, have urged Trump to back Cornyn, with some believing Paxton's long history of controversies could jeopardize their chances of holding the seat in November.
If Trump throws his support behind Cornyn, there's no guarantee Paxton — a popular figure with the MAGA base — will drop his bid. “No, I'm staying in this race,” Paxton told Real America's Voice this week. “I owe it to the people of Texas.”
In a later post on social media, Paxton said he “would consider dropping out” of the Senate race if GOP leaders in the chamber agreed to do away with the filibuster and pass the SAVE Act, an elections bill that would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, among other provisions.
How the runoff plays out could have Texas-sized implications for the Senate map and allocation of resources, with Republicans believing it would require significant additional spending to boost Paxton in a general election.
Talarico's primary victory and his “politics of love” message are lifting the Democratic Party's hopes of flipping Texas — where Democrats have not won statewide since 1994 — particularly in a potential matchup against Paxton. After her primary loss to Talarico, US Rep. Jasmine Crockett quickly urged her supporters to rally around her former rival, who performed well in parts of the state with large shares of Latino voters.
Even as the GOP race remains unsettled, Republicans swiftly moved to try to define Talarico, circulating clips online they believe could resonate with voters in the conservative-leaning state come November.
Four states are at the center of the battle for the Senate majority: North Carolina, Georgia, Maine, Michigan.
To win control of the chamber, Democrats almost certainly must flip Maine and North Carolina while also holding on to seats in Georgia and Michigan. A loss in any of those would make the party's path much more difficult.
Sen. Jon Ossoff, the lone Democratic senator seeking reelection in a state Trump won in 2024, is sitting on a massive war chest as the GOP continues jockeying over the chance to run against him in November.
No candidate has yet to emerge as the clear leader in the three-way GOP primary between US Rep. Buddy Carter, US Rep. Mike Collins and Derek Dooley, the former football coach at the University of Tennessee. While Trump has so far not endorsed in the contest, Gov. Brian Kemp is backing Dooley.
South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, who leads the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has urged Georgia leaders to coalesce around a single candidate. “We need to get it down to one candidate as soon as possible,” Scott told The Washington Examiner. “And if we are able to do so, we have a chance to be successful there. But as long as we have three candidates, it's gonna be tougher for us.”
The split field and the lack of Trump's involvement raises the chances the race might not be settled on May 19. If no candidate clears the 50% majority threshold in the GOP primary, the contest will head to a June runoff, dragging out the intraparty fight and giving Ossoff a clearer path heading into November.
Sen. Susan Collins, the only GOP senator running in a state former Vice President Kamala Harris carried in 2024, unboxed a pair of New Balance sneakers as she made her reelection bid official last month. “This is perfect for 2026 because I'm running,” she said in the video.
But which Democrat she will run against remains an open question. The Democratic primary between progressive oyster farmer Graham Platner and two-term Gov. Janet Mills is still three months from being decided.
Polling shows Platner currently holding an advantage — with a recent University of New Hampshire survey putting him up more than 30 points over Mills, who is favored by the party establishment, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. That suggests Democratic primary voters so far have not been swayed by the controversies surrounding Platner's candidacy, including past offensive online posts and a tattoo resembling a Nazi symbol.
The dynamics of the Iran war could become a factor in this race, particularly if US military action extends for a prolonged period of time. Democrats seized on the decision by Collins to vote against a war powers resolution aimed at requiring the president seek congressional approval for future military action against the country.
The Democratic field in Michigan remains splintered with the nominating contest in the pivotal battleground state still five months away.
Republicans believe the extended intraparty fight on the Democratic side could work to the advantage of Mike Rogers, the former GOP congressman who lost a 2024 Senate bid against Sen. Elissa Slotkin.
The Democratic race to succeed retiring Sen. Gary Peters includes Abdul El-Sayed, the progressive former executive director of the Detroit Health Department; state Sen. Mallory McMorrow; and US Rep. Haley Stevens, a moderate who is seen as the favorite of the party establishment.
Some divisions within the primary field are beginning to play out. At a forum hosted by the United Auto Workers last month, the three candidates drew distinctions over the role of corporate political action committees in elections.
El-Sayed and McMorrow each said their campaigns are not accepting contributions from corporate PACs. Stevens did not directly answer the question and instead focused on calling for an end to Citizens United, a US Supreme Court decision that opened a flood of outside money into electoral politics. McMorrow seized on Stevens' response, saying, “We need to know who our next senator is working for.”
Beyond the four main battleground states, Democrats and Republicans are also eyeing targets in states where the opposing party holds an advantage at this stage.
Democrats are hoping their chosen candidate in Alaska can help make a dent in the GOP majority in the Senate.
Former US Rep. Mary Peltola, a moderate running with a “fish, family, and freedom” message, was recruited into the race by Democratic leadership. She has a history winning statewide, though she lost her House reelection bid in 2024.
Peltola will face steep competition as she challenges two-term GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan in a state where Trump won by double digits in his three presidential runs. Moderate GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski has backed Sullivan's reelection bid despite endorsing Peltola in her House races in the past.
Ohio has been trending toward Republicans in recent years, but Democrats believe a strong recruit can help them expand the map here.
Former Sen. Sherrod Brown, who lost his seat to Sen. Bernie Moreno in 2024, is back for another round as he challenges Sen. Jon Husted, who was appointed to the seat vacated by Vice President JD Vance.
Brown is no stranger to competitive races and has long been aligned with the economic populism that has taken a stronger hold within the Democratic Party today. Republicans believe that the state's shift to the right during the Trump era gives Husted a structural advantage as he seeks a full six-year term in the Senate.
Democrats face an uphill climb in this state that Trump carried by solid margins in all three of his presidential runs, but they hope the decline in the president's approval, particularly his handling of tariffs, could work in their favor here.
US Rep. Ashley Hinson has Trump's endorsement in the GOP primary as she attempts to succeed retiring Sen. Joni Ernst.
The Democratic field narrowed last month when Marine Corps veteran Nathan Sage dropped out of the race and backed state Rep. Josh Turek, a two-time Paralympic gold medalist. Turek is facing off against state Sen. Zach Wahls, a progressive who gained national attention in 2011 when he addressed the Iowa House of Representatives, speaking in defense of marriage equality and about being raised by his two mothers.
Republicans are hoping a familiar name in New Hampshire will give them an opening in the race to succeed retiring Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.
Democrats are optimistic they will hold onto the state given its political lean and the broader electoral environment. US Rep. Chris Pappas, who is the first gay person to represent New Hampshire in Congress, is considered the Democratic frontrunner and has won tough races for his House seat.
But Republicans think a comeback bid by former Sen. John E. Sununu, who has been out of office since 2009 and whose family has been a fixture in Granite State politics for decades, could be successful. Sununu earned Trump's endorsement earlier this year in the primary against former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown.
Republicans see Minnesota as trending in their direction long-term. But the political environment might make winning there in 2026 difficult. The president's immigration enforcement actions in Minneapolis, including the fatal shootings of two protesters by federal agents, also have emerged as a flashpoint in the state.
Democrats are confident they can defend home turf in Minnesota in the race to succeed retiring Democratic Sen. Tina Smith, especially with Sen. Amy Klobuchar — a popular figure in the state — running for governor. The August primary features an ideological clash between moderate Rep. Angie Craig and progressive Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan. While the state has consistently backed Democrats in presidential elections, Harris only carried it by about 4 points in 2024.
Republicans see former sportscaster Michele Tafoya as the best candidate to potentially make the seat competitive.
© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app on Google Play.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app from the Apple Store.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG.
Gov. Abigail Spanberger, D-Va., praises anti-ICE protests and school walkouts across the country in Democrats' response to President Donald Trump's State of the Union address.
Democratic Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger is taking heat for telling the Department of Homeland Security that if it wants to take custody of an illegal immigrant facing state murder charges, the department should obtain a judicial warrant, a document that critics and legal experts say is irrelevant in this particular case.
White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller said judicial warrants were not applicable for Abdul Jalloh, a Sierra Leone national who allegedly stabbed 41-year-old Fredericksburg mother Stephanie Minter to death at a bus stop in February.
Miller was among several Republicans to criticize Spanberger in a clash that underscored a broader battle between DHS and so-called sanctuary states and cities. The administration has argued that Democratic leaders of those jurisdictions are resisting cooperating with DHS, leading to violent criminals being released onto the streets, while Democrats say their policies are in place to enhance public safety.
Judicial warrants "have nothing to do with deportation," Miller wrote on X Monday. "Zero. Nothing."
White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller speaks during a press briefing at the White House, May 1, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
"The system for deporting criminal aliens from state custody is, and always has been, ICE requesting a custody transfer prior to release," Miller said. "Thousands of criminals are removed every week through this system. In Sanctuary cities/states, criminal aliens are simply set free to maim and murder."
Federal government authorities can obtain judicial warrants from a court when there is probable cause that a federal crime was committed and are not used in civil immigration proceedings.
Andrew Arthur, a law and policy fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, told Fox News Digital that under immigration law, the Department of Homeland Security can begin deportation proceedings after serving detainers and administrative warrants on jurisdictions detaining immigrants who are allegedly living in the country illegally, and then arrest the immigrants when they are released from jails.
ICE can smoothly carry out these arrests when state and local authorities honor the detainers and administrative warrants, which involves giving ICE a heads-up about an immigrant's imminent release.
VIRGINIA GOVERNOR LAUDS ANTI-ICE STUDENT WALKOUTS AT SCHOOLS DURING DEMOCRATIC REBUTTAL TO TRUMP
Abdul Jalloh, 32, is accused of killing Stephanie Minter, 41, at a Virginia bus stop. (Fox 5 DC)
In Jalloh's case, ICE "wants to take custody of him so they can put him through removal proceedings," Arthur said.
DHS authorities say Jalloh had been arrested 30 times, including for violent offenses, before targeting Minter. The recent violent offense came after emails obtained by local outlet WJLA showed the Fairfax County Police Department also repeatedly warned Fairfax County Commonwealth's Attorney Steve Descano's office about Jalloh.
Arthur said the purpose of ICE seeking cooperation from Fairfax County was to prevent Jalloh from being released into the public again.
"The issue is, if a state court judge grants him bond or releases him, or if the prosecutor's office simply releases him and ICE isn't notified, he's going to be back out on the street," Arthur said.
ICE NABS IRANIAN NATIONAL WITH RAPE, SODOMY CONVICTIONS AFTER VIRGINIA DEMOCRATS MOVE TO CURB COOPERATION
Virginia Gov. Abigail Spanberger speaks during inaugural ceremonies at the Capitol in Richmond, Va., on Saturday, Jan. 17, 2026. (Steve Helber/AP Photo)
Obtaining a judicial warrant to deport Jalloh is "not only not applicable. It's not possible," Arthur said.
"[Spanberger] might as well say, 'If you give me a gallon of water from the moon I'll hand him to you,' because water doesn't exist on the moon any more than judicial warrants exist in the immigration enforcement context," Arthur said.
DHS and ICE also lambasted Spanberger on social media. DHS accused her of "fighting to protect a MURDERER over American citizens," while ICE said uncooperative state leaders had "disdain" for their residents.
"Governor Spanberger's response to this murder and to our ICE detainer: ‘Get a judicial warrant.' Sanctuary state politicians have a true disdain for public safety and the constituents they serve," ICE wrote on X.
Spanberger's office did not respond to multiple requests for comment.
Her office previously told WJLA that the governor supported violent illegal immigrants' deportations, despite Spanberger terminating cooperation agreements with DHS, which sanctuary jurisdictions do to limit how local and state jails coordinate with federal immigration authorities.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
"As a former federal law enforcement officer who conducted joint search and arrest warrants alongside state and local officers, Governor Spanberger firmly believes that violent criminals who are in the United States illegally should be deported by immigration enforcement," Spanberger's office said. "DHS should request a signed judicial warrant to ensure this violent criminal is deported."
Ashley Oliver is a reporter for Fox News Digital and FOX Business, covering the Justice Department and legal affairs. Email story tips to ashley.oliver@fox.com.
Get the latest updates from the 2024 campaign trail, exclusive interviews and more Fox News politics content.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and
agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can
opt-out at any time.
Subscribed
You've successfully subscribed to this newsletter!
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by
Factset. Powered and implemented by
FactSet Digital Solutions.
Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by
LSEG.
Jamie Ager acknowledged that his path to flipping his western North Carolina seat involves what he called “difficult math.”
Democrats haven't represented the state's 11th District in more than a decade, and President Donald Trump carried the seat by 10 points in 2024 under its current district lines. But Ager, a fourth-generation farmer who won the Democratic primary Tuesday, is hoping his deep ties to the community will help overcome his party's reputation.
“Because I know so many people in the community, I've been a good business partner to a lot of folks, people see me less in the context of political partisanship, and more in the context of a friend, a neighbor, community member,” Ager said.
In their bid to take back the House in November, national Democrats have sought to expand their map deeper into Republican territory, hoping that candidates like Ager can make the races more competitive.
But before Democrats can contest control of the US House, they must first make their way through a monthslong primary season full of competitive primaries in blue, purple and red-leaning districts.
Tuesday's primaries offered some clues as to how that process could go.
Turnout figures suggest Democrats have high enthusiasm on their side heading into the midterms. Roughly 200,000 more votes were cast in North Carolina's Democratic contest for US Senate than on the Republican side. And in Texas, Democratic turnout in the Senate primary was the highest for any midterm contest since at least 1970.
National Democrats got their preferred candidates in primaries for North Carolina's 11th District and Texas' 15th, where they hope Tejano music star Bobby Pulido can run a competitive race in a seat Trump carried by 18 points in 2024.
Ager and Pulido's victories were a boon to the moderate wing of the party, which has backed candidates who fit their districts even if they buck some progressive ideas.
“If you give voters a distinct choice, you can escape the gravity of the terrible party brand weighing you down,” said Liam Kerr, the co-founder of Welcome PAC, a centrist group that endorsed the two candidates. “I think the parties, both parties, don't make enough longshot bets. They don't stretch the map enough.”
Ager, whose grandfather represented the district as a Democrat, said the version of the party he grew up with represented working people, but his party has failed to communicate a clear message over the last decade. The party needs to “focus on issues that affect working people” and “communicate that message in ways that people are familiar with.”
Pulido, a Latin Grammy winner, was criticized by his opponent for his personal opposition to abortion. National Democrats believe his socially conservative profile could help him in November against two-term GOP Rep. Monica De La Cruz.
“We've been getting our butts kicked for a long time. And we have to find out why that is,” Pulido told CNN at his watch party in Pharr, Texas. “And there's a lot of people that we've got to go bring back.”
Democrats are still facing at least half a dozen competitive primaries, including in key swing districts in Colorado, Nebraska, and California.
“The primaries will work themselves out,” said Adam Bozzi, a longtime Democratic strategist. “Regardless of who wins some of these primaries, the energy is on the Democratic side.”
Republicans are also facing challenging House primaries. In two Texas districts drawn to favor the GOP, Trump ally and occasional MAGA antagonist Rep. Dan Crenshaw was defeated by state Rep. Steve Toth. And US Rep. Tony Gonzales, who on Wednesday acknowledged an affair with a staffer who later died by suicide, was also forced into a May 26 runoff against activist Brandon Herrera.
After facing calls from House Republicans to drop out, Gonzalez ended his reelection bid on Thursday, paving the way for Herrera to become the party's nominee without a runoff.
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, House Democrats' campaign arm, announced a second expansion of its House map last month, adding seats, including Montana's 1st Congressional District, where incumbent GOP Rep. Ryan Zinke announced this week he won't seek reelection, and Colorado's 5th District, where incumbent GOP Rep. Jeff Crank was outraised by a Democratic challenger last year.
“Going into the midterms, the political environment is breaking our way as the public sours on Republicans' broken promises,” said DCCC spokesperson Viet Shelton. “We have the better candidates, the better message, and most importantly – we have the American people on our side.”
Republicans have argued that they're the party on offense.
Mike Marinella, a spokesperson for the National Republican Congressional Committee, House Republicans' campaign arm, called the efforts to reach into Trump territory “political hallucinations.”
“They can fantasize about ‘expanding' the map all they want, but they're operating on our turf, and they'll be wasting their money defending their weak incumbents and stitching together their messy primaries,” he said in a statement.
Before Democrats can compete in Republican districts, they have to contend with crowded primaries where moderates are being challenged by more progressive candidates, Republicans say.
“They first need to maybe pump the brakes and take a look at the primary problem they have going on,” said Chris Pack, a Republican strategist who worked for the NRCC in 2020.
The nationwide mid-cycle redistricting battle is still being waged in courtrooms and state capitals. As of now, Republicans have gained an advantage in nine districts, after redrawing maps in Texas, Missouri, Ohio and North Carolina. Democrats could flip as many as six seats, after California voters passed new Democratic maps and a Utah court decision created a blue district in the state.
But that balance could tilt in the coming months. Democrats in Missouri are hoping to put up a ballot initiative to vote to overturn their new, Republican-drawn maps. In Florida, Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis has called for a special session in April to redraw his state's maps.
In Virginia, Democrats have introduced new maps that would target four Republican-held seats if approved by voters in an April referendum. The Virginia Supreme Court this week lifted a lower court's stay on the referendum and former President Barack Obama taped an ad supporting the proposal ahead of early voting beginning on Friday.
And both parties are awaiting a decision from the Supreme Court on a Voting Rights Act case that is expected to deal a blow to majority-minority districts.
© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app on Google Play.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app from the Apple Store.
When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can't do it on our own.
We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?
As baby boomers age, caregivers are often squeezed caring for parents and children at the same time. They need help.
You walk into the room and a whole crowd of people is belting out an uneven but spirited version of “Ain't No Mountain High Enough” by Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell. A former lawyer dressed in a Beatles T-shirt taps his knees as if he were a professional drummer. Another guy, long and lanky in a well-pressed suit, closes his eyes and quietly sings the chorus with real feeling: “Ain't no valley low enough / ain't no river wide enough / to keep me from gettin' to you, babe.”
A woman with long silver hair and a knit hat shouts, “This is my favorite song!”
She said that last time. And the time before. No, this isn't a dive bar. And no, this woman isn't in love with every song in the karaoke binder. This is a day program for elders with dementia and Alzheimer's. And it's an oasis for so many older people and their families.
There are over 3,100 programs with about 200,000 people nationally, and they are in constant threat of being shut down at precisely the moment when we need them most — as the largest generation of Americans that ever lived ages into retirement, and their children struggle to care for them while often raising children of their own.
By 2030, the entire baby boom generation will be 65 and older — creating an unprecedented need for elder care at a moment when “sandwich generation” caregivers are outnumbered, and often already financially squeezed, including by their younger dependents. Add to that the reality that there is a profound national shortage of professional caregivers to call on.
Twenty-three million Americans now care for elders, surpassing the 21 million caring for preschool children. That unpaid care is valued at over $600 billion annually, placing tremendous strain on the 63 million family caregivers in America, many of whom are stressed to the point of burn out. According to AARP, half of working caregivers caring for a family member or friend report having to rearrange their work schedule, decrease their hours, or take an unpaid leave in order to meet their caregiving responsibilities.
Add to this the reality that more people than ever work from home — the latest government statistics put it at about a quarter of us — and it's increasingly challenging to maintain professionalism on a Zoom call when your elderly dad is popping into the frame to ask when lunch is!
So how can America meet this inflection point with real, viable solutions?
One answer is hiding in plain sight: day programs (or what insiders call “community-based adult services” or “adult day centers”).
These programs, like child care centers, not only make all the other work of our country possible — freeing up adult children and partners to stay in the workforce — but they also offer socialization for our elders and allow for wraparound services, like podiatry, physical therapy, and enrichment like arts and music, all of which are crucial for keeping their quality of life high and their hospital admission low.
What's more, day programs are far less costly than the alternatives of home health care and assisted living. According to recent estimates, the median day program costs $100 a day vs. about $200 for assisted living and over $200 for in-home care. And as spending on the elderly is taking up larger and larger chunks of the federal budget, any savings could go a long way toward freeing space for other priorities.
I became interested in adult day centers when I became a caregiver for my own dad, who has early-onset dementia. He and my mom lived with my family — me, my husband, and my two kids, 9 and 12 — for over a year, and it was tumultuous. He would wander out of the house while my mom showered or I was taking a meeting and be found confused and dehydrated miles away. When we tried to bring a professional caregiver in, my mom and I would have to hide in our rooms so he wouldn't see us; people with dementia often develop shadowing behavior, where they follow their primary caregivers around wherever they go.
His brief stint at Alzheimer's Services of the East Bay, a day program in California designed for elders with dementia, was a golden time for our whole family — my burned-out mom could get a nap, I could get my work done, and my kids could have friends over after school without worrying that the noise would cause my dad to become agitated.
But our golden time was short-lived. This program, beloved by so many local families for nearly three decades, was shut down because it couldn't sustain itself on Medi-Cal reimbursement rates — the states' Medicaid program — that hadn't budged since 2009. According to Brian Rutldedge, executive director of the California Association for Adult Day Services, the state gave the organization $76.27 a day for care that costs $250 to provide. Leadership at the program was forced to turn Medicaid-qualifying seniors away, or put themselves in financial ruin; they chose the latter and it eventually bankrupted them.
A few months later, we drove my dad to a memory care facility where he has lived ever since; an alternative that we are lucky enough to be able to pay for, despite the fact that it is three times what we were paying out-of-pocket for his day program.
Many of the other families in that program have not been so lucky.
“A year later, my mom still gets up every morning asking when the van will pick her up,” one adult daughter of a former client told me. “This is heartbreaking for me.”
She's yet to find a long-term alternative solution that can fit their needs and budget.
Adult day care centers were originally designed with the kinds of issues facing families like ours in mind. William Zagorski's parents started Tennessee's first medical-model day program when he was just 11 years old in 1991 after his grandmother was discharged from a social model program because of her tendency to wander (she had dementia) and the fact that she needed medication assistance. He now runs three centers in his home state and is the chair of the board of the National Adult Day Services Association.
Day programs, Zagorski says, cost a fraction of more intensive services like skilled nursing facilities and assisted living. They “combat loneliness, and they are far less vulnerable to worker shortages” in an industry where help is chronically in short supply. “They really are the best-kept secret in America,” he said.
An increasing number of elders in the United States fall into what some researchers call the “forgotten middle.”
But my own family experience struggling to find care options isn't unique. And precisely as the silver wave of boomers is cresting, the One Big Beautiful Bill will make it harder for centers to stay open. The bill dramatically reduces state funding and flexibility, which advocates warn will force decision makers into lose-lose decisions, such as which Medicaid services to pull back on. The vast majority of those in day programs depend on public benefits of some kind — whether Medicaid, Veterans Affairs, or Older Americans Act.
This isn't the first time these programs have been in jeopardy. During the Great Recession, an economic-driven drop in government funding led states to reduce Medicaid's reach and impact. In California, where I live, the state proposed eliminating adult day health care entirely as a cost saving measure, even though adult day is unarguably cheaper than the alternatives. Advocacy and lawsuits were the only thing that kept it going.
There was also a dramatic drop in day programs during the height of the Covid pandemic, which made it dangerous for elders to gather in person. Tia Sauceda, who is now the executive director of the National Adult Day Services Association, ran four day programs in Colorado at that time, and three of the four had to shut down. “We're back there again, just needing to defend what we have, rather than having the luxury of imagining how we can expand to meet the growing need,” Sauceda said.
The funding formula for these programs also creates additional difficulties for families. An increasing number of elders in the United States fall into what some researchers call the “forgotten middle” — meaning their annual income and accumulated savings are too high for them to qualify for Medicaid and too low for them to afford in-home professional care, day programs, or assisted living. One report estimates that over the next decade, the number of middle-income seniors will almost double — reaching almost 16 million by 2033.
Families are often forced into an impossible choice — spend down their parents' hard-earned assets so they can be destitute enough to qualify for Medicaid, or let them hold onto what they've earned and go into debt in other ways trying to get them the care they need. One adult daughter I spoke to had to make the heartbreaking decision to sell the home her mother had worked her entire life to buy — a symbol for her of breaking generational hardship after the Great Migration — and plunge her mother back into poverty just so they could get the care she needed as her dementia advanced.
One of the largest day program operators in the country is called Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE). There are currently 198 PACE programs operating in 33 states plus the District of Columbia. Over 90 percent of elders enrolled in PACE are dual eligible for Medicaid and Medicare, which pays for their participation. PACE is the epitome of a one-stop-shop for vulnerable elders — providing medical care, prescriptions, activities, home care, transportation, various kinds of therapies, meals, and even housing navigation.
But PACE isn't a panacea. It's designed for vulnerable elders 55 and over, but not specifically people like my dad and the 7 million other Americans with Alzheimer's/dementia who need particular kinds of environmental conditions and support with transitions. Its one-stop-shop nature also isn't for everyone; some elders would like more discretion about their health care providers.
Perhaps the most powerful solution, certainly for sandwich generation caregivers, is colocated care programs, where child care and elder care happen on the same site, and even intermingle. Studies show that elders with dementia are often supported by the Montessori approach that's typically associated with children. The emphasis on tactile learning, sense of roles and responsibilities, and collaboration are all excellent for both stages of brain development. But, unfortunately, these kinds of colocated programs are still relatively rare in the United States; by most estimates there are only about 150 total.
While advocates continue to fight for Medicaid reimbursement rates to be raised, and the pie-in-the-sky dream of Medicare coverage for day programs, all eyes are on Washington state, where the very first public mandatory long-term care insurance program — WaCares — is starting to make its first payouts. The program provides funding for Washingtonians to pay for, among a variety of things, professional care like that provided in adult day centers. If it works, many other states are poised to adopt this model. Nationally, only 4 percent Americans 50 and older have long-term care insurance despite the fact that seven out of 10 Americans will need long-term care at some point.
Private sector solutions could also make a huge difference. Forward-thinking employers could include elder care as part of their benefits — most significantly, on-site care, or even just investing in local programs, reimbursing employees for the costs associated with sending their aging parents to programs, or at the very lightest touch, care navigation (whereas their employees can count on support finding local resources). Only 7 percent of employers are currently offering subsidies or on-site services for eldercare.
One bright spot is Medicare's Guiding and Improved Dementia Experience (GUIDE) program, which officially began in 2024. It will run for eight years. It is a federal effort to support both people with dementia and their caregivers by providing care navigation, a 24/7 support line, caregiver training and education, and most importantly, respite services — short-term relief for caregivers — of up to $2,500 annually. This is the first time that Medicare funds are going directly to ongoing respite care, which is, in a sense, a policy gateway to arguing that adult day programs should be funded more broadly by Medicare dollars rather than Medicaid.
Advocates are encouraged by these experiments, but they're still only a start. In the coming years, they're hoping to protect existing programs, advocate for additional ones, and collect more data to make their case.
“The economic argument is there, but it's more than that,” Sauceda, the National Adult Day Services Association executive director, said. “These programs are a life raft in the caregiver space. At the end of the day, we are truly changing lives.”
Understand the world with a daily explainer, plus the most compelling stories of the day.
This is the title for the native ad
The giant loophole that lets Big Dairy keep baby cows in solitary confinement
What the AI jobs panic is missing.
Every detail matters in puzzles, and details are where AI art often falls short.
How scientists (and the rest of us) are finding 16,000 new species a month.
Your pet fish — or bird, or hamster — is probably miserable.
This is the title for the native ad
© 2026 Vox Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by Factset. Powered and implemented by FactSet Digital Solutions. Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by LSEG.
Jonathan Fahey, former DHS deputy assistant secretary, expresses concern about Iranian nationals illegally crossing the border and the millions of 'gotaways' who are unvetted.
In the tense days following the U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani on Jan. 3, 2020, Iran responded with missile barrages on American bases in Iraq, injuring scores of people but deliberately avoiding fatalities. Tehran promised "harsh retaliation," but no attacks struck U.S. soil. The reason wasn't deterrence alone or diplomatic restraint but something simpler: Iran lacked operational assets inside the United States.
At the time, the regime had only scattered sympathizers, not embedded networks capable of executing homeland strikes. U.S. intelligence assessments after the strike highlighted threats abroad but noted no credible, specific domestic dangers because Iran's reach stopped short of American borders.
Secure frontiers and rigorous vetting under the Trump administration ensured that potential operatives couldn't infiltrate U.S. defenses easily. Encounters with Iranians at the U.S. southern border averaged less than 20 annually from 2000 to 2019. The homeland remained insulated from the threat of terrorism from Iran.
Now, in March 2026, as U.S. and Israeli forces destroy Iran's nuclear sites and tyrannical leadership in Operation Epic Fury — killing Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and sparking regional responses — the calculus has shifted perilously. Iran has fired missiles on U.S. outposts in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and beyond.
Fox News drones captured footage of a massive group of illegal border crossers in Eagle Pass, Texas. (Fox News)
But the gravest risk simmers within the United States: potential activation of sleeper cells or lone actors on American soil. This vulnerability stems directly from four years of open-border policies under President Joe Biden, who flung doors wide open to unchecked immigration, swelling Iran's pool of sympathizers in the United States and possibly embedding assets at the regime's behest.
US ON HIGH ALERT FOR IRANIAN SLEEPER CELLS, PROXIES
After the Soleimani strike, Iran's plots against the U.S. homeland were aspirational at best. The regime planned assassinations of U.S. officials, including President Donald Trump and former national security advisor John Bolton, as revenge for the general's death. Yet these fizzled under vigilant counterterrorism efforts and gained no operational foothold in the United States.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) bulletins warned of Iran's intentions to use proxies such as Hezbollah, but emphasized its lack of immediate capability to carry out domestic attacks. Borders acted as a bulwark; Trump's "maximum pressure" sanctions and law-based immigration enforcement choked infiltration routes. Iranian-backed networks lurked in South America's tri-border area, but U.S. enforcement cut off their northward paths.
Biden's reversal of these policies invited chaos. Starting on Inauguration Day, he dismantled the border wall, axed the very successful "Remain in Mexico" policy, and allowed catch-and-release numbers to balloon. Over 10 million encounters with illegal immigrants followed, including surges from terrorism-prone nations. Apprehensions of Iranians skyrocketed: Border Patrol arrested 1,504 Iranian nationals from fiscal year 2021 to 2024 — a twenty-fivefold leap from the two prior decades.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Alarmingly, 729 of them were released into the United States, often after scant vetting amid overwhelmed systems. This wasn't mere oversight; policies such as expanded asylum loopholes and deportation reluctance effectively welcomed risks. In June 2025, ICE rounded up 11 Iranians illegally present in the country, including a former army sniper, a Revolutionary Guard member, and a Hezbollah affiliate — all of whom had slipped in during Biden's tenure. Intelligence flagged 35 more Iranians plotting cartel-aided crossings that same month.
These entrants expanded Iran's base of sympathizers and potentially provided support for assets of the Iranian regime. Border czar Tom Homan decried the fueling of "sleeper cells," a sentiment echoed in DHS alerts about Iran's use of proxies amid escalating conflicts. Biden's approach to immigration didn't just strain resources; it extended an invitation to adversaries. As one national security expert put it, U.S. borders became a "sieve" through which global threats could pass. Hezbollah's long-standing Latin American hubs funneled operatives north, exploiting the lax border enforcement.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Today, with Khamenei dead and Iran's regime cornered, desperation mounts. Trump warns of Tehran's nuclear brinkmanship. Experts foresee retaliation against the U.S. homeland through infiltrated cells — cells likely planted during the Biden administration. Texas Governor Greg Abbott urges vigilance against "sleeper cells or lone wolves," and former Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe calls for elevated alerts over infiltration. A recent shooting in Austin, Texas, tied to an Iran-linked suspect heightens fears of terrorist attacks at home.
The explosion of risk is profound. In 2020, Iran's dearth of assets spared the homeland. Now, Biden's immigration policies have stocked a tinderbox of sympathizers and unknowns, ready for conflagration. Averting – or at least minimizing – disaster requires sealing the borders, reviving stringent vetting and expelling threats. These are all steps the Trump administration has pursued aggressively, but we must commit to maintain such a course for years to come and never let our country inflict such risks upon itself ever again.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE BY KEN CUCCINELLI
Ken Cuccinelli is the former Virginia attorney general and former acting deputy secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
Get the recap of top opinion commentary and original content throughout the week.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and
agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can
opt-out at any time.
Subscribed
You've successfully subscribed to this newsletter!
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2026 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. Quotes displayed in real-time or delayed by at least 15 minutes. Market data provided by
Factset. Powered and implemented by
FactSet Digital Solutions.
Legal Statement. Mutual Fund and ETF data provided by
LSEG.
Amid chaos at the top of the Labor Department, the agency disbursed tens of millions of dollars in grant funding to race-based and left-of-center organizations, a break from the Trump administration's uniform efforts to root out taxpayer spending on liberal groups.
Labor Secretary Lori Chavez DeRemer faces an internal investigation following accusations that she used public funds for personal travel, engaged in politically motivated grantmaking, created a hostile work environment, and engaged in an affair with a subordinate. Two of DeRemer's top aides recently resigned from the department, the New York Post reported, citing sources that said departmental investigators had gathered sufficient evidence to tie them to some of the aforementioned ethics violations.
While DeRemer was allegedly focused on taking staffers to a strip club and using departmental funds to throw herself a birthday party, her agency was busy distributing close to $60 million in funds to organizations with racial focuses or liberal mission statements, according to grant records reviewed by the Washington Examiner.
“The executive branch functions under the authority and direction of the President, and federal agencies are expected to carry out the policies and priorities established by the administration,” Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX) told the Washington Examiner. “Congress maintains an important oversight role in ensuring that agencies administer federal funds consistent with the law and with the policy direction set by the executive branch.”
“Under the Trump administration, the expectation is clear: federal agencies should focus grant funding on programs that deliver real results for the American people, and initiatives associated with what many have described as the ‘woke' DEI agenda do not have a place in the use of taxpayer-funded grants,” Sessions added.
Some of the left-of-center groups funded under DeRemer's leadership have publicly opposed President Donald Trump's agenda.
Chicanos por la Causa, a Hispanic advocacy organization that accepted seed funding from the National Council of La Raza, has received a consistent stream of cash from the Labor Department under DeRemer's watch.
On its website, the group brags about participating in a lawsuit that successfully blocked the first Trump administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 Census. It also funds scholarships for DACA recipients and runs voter registration events for Latinos, a demographic that tends to favor the Democratic Party.
“This is not immigration policy, this is racial profiling against Latinos, Asians, and other people of color that runs counter to long-held American values,” Chicanos Por La Causa posted to its social media accounts in September 2025, criticizing the Trump administration's enforcement of immigration laws.
Some conservatives blame what they view as a failure of leadership at the department for the deluge of grants to left-of-center groups.
Mike Watson, director of research at the Capital Research Center, said there “certainly is an institutional bureaucracy” at DOL that seeks to push liberal policies.
“When the cat's away, the mice will play,” Watson said, alluding to DeRemer's alleged absentee leadership at the department. “The bureaucrats will do what the bureaucrats have been doing for as long as these agencies have existed, which is trying to use big government to advance the progressive agenda.”
“Bureaucrats who aren't being supervised, who aren't being closely watched, they'll do what they want to do, they'll do what they have been doing, they'll do what they got into government to do, which is to make government bigger, which is to make government more intrusive, and which is to make government carry out the progressive agenda,” Watson added.
Indeed, left-of-center groups that have long enjoyed the Labor Department's patronage have continued to do so during DeRemer's tenure.
The National Urban League, for instance, won $13,295,208 in grant funding from the Department of Labor in October 2025.
Primarily an African American civil rights organization, the league advocates of left-of-center policy priorities such as race-based affirmative action and the Affordable Care Act. Its leader, the former Democratic mayor of New Orleans, called for the prosecution of Trump over his involvement in the Jan. 6 riots.
The Soros family's Open Society Foundations and other left-of-center philanthropies have also provided funding to the National Urban League.
Job training programs affiliated with organized labor also continued to win millions of dollars in grants from the DOL. An electrician training organization affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which overwhelmingly supports the Democratic Party, has been granted nearly $2 million under DeRemer. It is just one of many such programs.
Watson, an expert on organized labor, conceded that reining in these union-related expenditures could be beyond the abilities of even a competent labor secretary, given the desire of northeastern Republican congressmen to keep unions placated.
DeRemer has denied the allegations levied against her and her department.
“At the direction of President Trump, the Department of Labor acted swiftly and decisively to eliminate discriminatory DEI funding and other grants that put America Last, saving taxpayers tens of millions of dollars annually,” DOL spokeswoman Courtney Parella told the Washington Examiner. “We remain committed to ensuring that funding decisions align with the Administration's priorities, which is why we've made historic investments in expanding Registered Apprenticeships and bolstering workforce development programs to help President Trump usher in a Golden Age for American Workers.”
In May, the Labor Department claimed it had saved $400 million by cutting wasteful spending, primarily by pruning Biden-era programs. DeRemer has also taken deregulatory actions and has been a vocal critic of DEI, both of which are consistent with Trump's broader platform.
A source at DOL, who requested anonymity, claimed that none of the grantees identified by the Washington Examiner “were selected by this administration” and that many of the steps the department has tried to take to rein in purportedly wasteful spending have been thwarted by legal challenges.
Staffers have reportedly described DeRemer as an “absentee secretary” who has left employees “deeply demoralized.”
“Over the past few weeks, we've learned that not only is she not doing her job, she's embroiling the department in scandal and possible criminal activity,” Helen Luryi, a staffer who left the department in April 2025, told the New York Times. “It's frankly embarrassing.”
“Secretary Chavez-DeRemer firmly denies any allegations of wrongdoing,” the secretary's lawyer told the New York Post in January. “Her utmost priority remains to advance President Trump's agenda by continuing her hard and successful work for the betterment of the American people.”
Other race-based or left-leaning organizations funded by the DOL under DeRemer's watch include the National Association for Hispanic Elderly, the National Asian Pacific Center on Aging, the National Indian Council on Aging, and 100 Black Men.
The National Asian Pacific Center on Aging, the National Association for Hispanic Elderly, and the National Indian Council on Aging are all part of the Diverse Elders Coalition, an organization that supports DEI policies focused on older Americans.
“Founded in 2010, the Diverse Elders Coalition (DEC) advocates for policies and programs that improve aging in our communities as racially and ethnically diverse people; American Indians and Alaska Natives; and lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender (LGBT) people,” the group's website reads. “In the decades to come, the communities represented by the DEC will collectively form the majority of older adults in the United States. The DEC is working to strengthen policies and programs to enhance the health and well-being of diverse elders, educating and connecting diverse older adults and their loved ones to key policy debates on aging, and increasing public support for issues that affect our communities.”
Additionally, the coalition opposes the Trump administration's deportation efforts, supports DACA, and generally advocates in support of looser immigration laws.
Some of the funding to these groups, such as grants to the National Urban League and race-based elder groups, was provided through the Senior Community Service Employment Program. DOL held up funding related to this program to conduct a review in 2025 and was subject to litigation for doing so.
EMBATTLED LABOR SECRETARY HAS HISTORY OF QUESTIONABLE SPENDING THAT ELUDED CONGRESS
All the racially focused groups funded by the DOL serve racial minority communities. The grants disbursed by the Labor Department to these nonprofit organizations generally funded their efforts to recruit and train individuals for workforce participation.
“In the most recent election, the American people delivered a clear mandate, and it is the responsibility of executive agencies to faithfully implement that mandate through their operations, policies, and funding decisions,” Sessions told the Washington Examiner. “As such, the administration has made clear that federal programs and grant funding should reflect priorities rooted in merit, measurable outcomes, and service to the American people. The President has directed agencies to move away from policies and funding structures rooted in diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives advanced by the previous administration, and instead ensure that federal resources are allocated based on merit, effectiveness, and the public interest.”
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
People attend a student-led march on National Youth Day to call for the release of detainees, considered to be political prisoners by their relatives and human rights groups, in Valencia, Venezuela, Thursday, Feb. 12, 2026. (AP Photo/Jacinto Oliveros)
A demonstrator holds a Venezuelan flag during a student-led march calling for the release of people whose relatives and human rights groups consider political prisoners on National Youth Day in Caracas, Venezuela, Thursday, Feb. 12, 2026.(AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
Venezuela's acting President Delcy Rodriguez, right, and U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum shake hands after a meeting at Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas, Venezuela, Wednesday, March 4, 2026. (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — The United States and Venezuela agreed to reestablish diplomatic relations in a major shift in a historically adversarial relationship, the State Department said on Thursday.
The move comes after rounds of Trump administration officials have visited the South American nation following a U.S. military operation that deposed former President Nicolás Maduro in January. Since then, the Trump administration has been stepping up pressure on Maduro loyalists now in power to accept its vision for the oil-rich nation.
Relations between the two countries were cut off in 2019, during the first Trump administration, in a decision by Maduro. They closed their embassies mutually after U.S. President Donald Trump gave public support to Venezuelan opposition lawmaker Juan Guaidó, who claimed to be the nation's interim president in January that year. That prompted U.S. diplomatic staff to move to neighboring Colombia.
The State Department in a statement on Thursday said that talks between the countries were “focused on helping the Venezuelan people move forward through a phased process that creates the conditions for a peaceful transition to a democratically elected government.”
The announcement was made at the end of a two-day visit by U.S. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum to Venezuela. The visit largely focused on the country's mining sector. It followed a February visit by Energy Secretary Chris Wright that centered on Venezuela's oil potential. Both secretaries are aiming to shore up foreign investment to advance the administration's phased plan to turn around the crisis-wracked nation.
Acting President Delcy Rodríguez, formerly Maduro's vice president, said on state televisions that such steps “will strengthen relations between our two countries.”
Rodríguez's government in a statement later expressed confidence that reestablishing diplomatic relations “will contribute to strengthening understanding and opening opportunities for a positive and mutually beneficial relationship.”
“These relations ought to result in the social and economic happiness of the Venezuelan people,” she said.
Since the unprecedented U.S. offensive in Venezuela, the Trump administration has pushed the government to make sweeping changes, including opening its oil sector to foreign companies. Rodríguez's government also approved an amnesty law that has enabled the release of politicians, activists, lawyers and many others, effectively acknowledging that the government has held hundreds of people in prison for political motivations.
Trump stunned Venezuelans in and outside their home country with his decision to work with Rodríguez, instead of the political opposition, following Maduro's ouster. On Sunday, Venezuela's top opposition leader and winner of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize María Corina Machado said that she will return to Venezuela in the coming weeks and that elections will be held in Venezuela.
Such seismic shifts would have been unthinkable just months before in the South American nation. Venezuela's main political current, known as Chavismo, has been able to dodge curve balls thrown at it for years, from U.S. sanctions to spiraling economic crisis.
___
Janetsky reported from Mexico City.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Since the invention of moving pictures, directors have been drawn to Mary Shelley's 19th century gothic classic, “Frankenstein.” In 1931 James Whale offered his definitive take on the story with actor Boris Karloff's flat-topped skull and grunting speech. The film was a commercial hit and solidified Universal Pictures' reputation as the home of horror. The creature was then dug up and reanimated through the eyes of Terence Fisher in 1957, Mel Brooks in 1974 and Kenneth Branagh in 1994, to name a few. The last reboot — an emotionally sympathetic, albeit Disney-fied rendition in which Jacob Elordi's long dark lashes take center stage — came from Mexican director Guillermo del Toro just a few months ago. But while the mood, genre and artistic direction of these adaptations may have shifted over the last century, one element has remained fairly consistent: almost all have been directed by men.
Now a rare female voice enters the “Frankenstein” canon as Maggie Gyllenhaal's “The Bride!”, starring Jessie Buckley, opens in theaters across the US and UK this week. The actor-turned-director takes inspiration from Whale's spin-off sequel from 1935, “The Bride of Frankenstein,” starring Elsa Lanchester in a streaked electrified bouffant and arrow-like brows. In Shelley's novel, the lonely creature demands a romantic companion after he is rejected by humanity. His scientist creator, Victor Frankenstein, reluctantly agrees, but at the last moment tears the unfinished mate limb from limb as the creature watches on in horror. Whale, and later fellow directors Franc Rodman, Branagh and now Gyllenhaal, imagined what might have happened if Frankenstein had completed the female monster.
But the release of “The Bride!” stirs up some larger questions about how few women have adapted this story, despite the fact it was originally written by one. We asked scholars, film curators and experts in Shelley's work why that might be — and the impact it has on how we make sense of the 200-year-old tale.
The answer may be as simple as gender inequality. Throughout the early 20th century female film directors were few and far between, and could often be counted on one hand — from Alice Guy-Blanché and Lois Weber to Dorothy Arzner. “In film, there are far more male directors,” said Dr. Jo Botting, fiction curator at the BFI National Archive in London, matter-of-factly. “And I think horror is a genre that appeals possibly to more men.”
Still, some scholars think there is more to say about what draws the male directorial psyche to Shelley's novel. “One cynical view might be that they identify with the God Complex,” said Daniel Cook, a professor at Dundee University in Scotland and expert in 18th and 19th century literature. “In many ways ‘Frankenstein' the novel can function as a kind of metaphor for the creative process itself and its challenges, but also the rewards that come with that.” Just as Victor Frankenstein creates life, so do directors create an image of life on screen. “I think filmmakers perhaps feel a strange affinity with that,” Cook said.
Director Nia DaCosta: ‘I don't want to make a Danny Boyle movie. I'd rather watch one'
Eleanor B. Johnson, an English professor at Columbia University and author of “Scream with Me: Horror Films and the Rise of American Feminism,” believes previous male directors have tended to focus exclusively on the novel's themes of ambition and arrogance. “Filmmakers really like a narrative about hubris,” she said. “Victor Frankenstein's core problem is he overestimates his own power. It's the idea of a man who has hubris and then fails. That's epic. That's like our oldest story paradigm in the Western canon.”
“It's a very director-sexy topic,” she continued.
It's perhaps easy to forget with a story as enduring as “Frankenstein,” whose male characters have reached such mythic status, that the tale was originally written by a teenage girl. In fact, Shelley's novel was so inventive in its horrendousness that many of her contemporaries simply did not believe she could have written it. In the 1831 introduction to the book, Shelley wrote of the regular questioning she faced about how she, “a young girl, came to think of, and to dilate upon, so very hideous an idea?”
But for Johnson, it's exactly this context we've been missing when interpreting — and adapting — the book. “There's a feminist temptation to resist the impulse to read Mary Shelley's novel as a novel written by a woman,” she said. “But the fact is that she was a woman, and she wrote the novel in the throes of repeated reproductive loss and injury,” Johnson added. “And not paying attention to that really blunts what the novel is doing.”
Johnson's upcoming book, “Mother of Frankenstein: Mary Shelley's Creature in the 21st Century,” re-reads the story through the lens of the author's own tragic experience of motherhood. By the time she began writing the novel, Shelley had already lost her first child, Clara — and had even dreamed about bringing the baby back to life, according to diary entries. She went on to lose two more children in 1817 and 1819. Shelley re-used the name Clara for her second daughter, who died in infancy. “Which is not insignificant,” said Johnson. “She wanted to bring that baby back.” From this vantage point, the story can be understood as “a meditation on loss and vulnerability and grief,” said Johnson. “In particular, reproductive harm and reproductive loss.”
Even in the classroom, scholars are embarking on new readings of an old text. According to Cook, who teaches “Frankenstein” at university level, his students have recently become more interested in the novel's gender dynamics. Particularly, the introduction to the bride before she's torn to pieces and thrown into the sea. “They're really struck by the violence that Victor imposes in that scene,” he said. “It's just in the last two or three years, I think as discourse around gender based violence has really advanced, that they apply these ideas to a novel like ‘Frankenstein.'”
Dr. Botting argues not. “Does every story have to have a new female perspective? I don't know,” she said. “For me, the key to this story is that it's about male hubris and a man playing God. I think there's only so much tampering with the story in gender terms you can do.”
For Johnson, the answer is more complicated. The reading of “Frankenstein” as a tale of reproductive loss and maternal grief has been largely lost on-screen. “If you look at the major franchises in the 20th century,” she said, “all of them almost totally obliterate anything like a female perspective on the story.” She points out a number of female-centered “oblique adaptations” — movies that indirectly draw on themes in Shelley's novel — such as the 2021 Cannes Palme d'Or winner “Titane” by Julia Ducournau, for example, or “Birth / Rebirth” (2023) by Laura Moss. But amongst the nearly 20 explicit “Frankenstein” remakes created between 1931 and 1977, she said, “all those films focus on men.”
The original 1935 film that inspired Gyllenhaal's version also followed that vein. “I watched the movie and I was like, ‘Oh, the “Bride of Frankenstein” is a Frankenstein movie,” Gyllenhaal told the New York Times. In Whale's picture, the bride doesn't talk — only screams or hisses like an irritated cat — and is brought to life 5 minutes before the credits roll. It was this cinematic silencing that irked Gyllenhaal. “When I saw that movie, it made me think, ‘Wait,'” she said at her own film's premiere in London. “I want to know what she has to say. I want to know how she's thinking and feeling.”
However full the “Frankenstein” canon may feel, there's room for at least one more.
© 2026 Cable News Network. A Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app on Google Play.
Scan the QR code to download the CNN app from the Apple Store.
U.S. Central Command released a video on Thursday of the military successfully striking an Iranian drone ship similar in size to an aircraft carrier during World War II.
The unclassified footage comes on the sixth day of “Operation Epic Fury.”
U.S. forces aren't holding back on the mission to sink the entire Iranian Navy. Today, an Iranian drone carrier, roughly the size of a WWII aircraft carrier, was struck and is now on fire. pic.twitter.com/WyA4fniZck
Hours earlier, the commander of CENTCOM, Adm. Brad Cooper, said the drone carrier was one of more than 30 Iranian navy vessels that the United States has sunk so far.
“In just the last few hours, we hit an Iranian drone carrier ship roughly the size of a World War II aircraft carrier, and as we speak, it's on fire,” Cooper said at a Thursday afternoon press conference.
War Secretary Pete Hegseth signaled that the conflict will escalate further, noting Operation Epic Fury has “only just begun.” It's expected to last up to four or five weeks, but the timing could change.
Iran's military capabilities have been significantly destroyed in the past week, according to Cooper, who said that in addition to the naval losses, Iran's ability to launch retaliatory airstrikes has been dramatically reduced.
“Ballistic missile attacks have decreased by 90% since Day One. Drone attacks have decreased by 83% since Day One,” Cooper said.
US WAR IN IRAN IS ‘FULL STEAM AHEAD' WITH CONTINUED BOMBINGS
At a previous press conference on Wednesday, Hegseth and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine revealed that a U.S. submarine sank an Iranian warship off the coast of Sri Lanka in the first successful torpedo attack made by the U.S. since the end of World War II in 1945.
The Department of War released footage of the warship's destruction. In the video, a giant wave of water is seen rising in the air after the torpedo delivered a devastating blow to the enemy vessel, which eventually capsized as seen in a photo released by the department.
President Donald Trump suggested there could be an Iranian attack on American soil as the U.S. military continues to attack Iran.
When asked by Time magazine whether Americans should be worried about retaliatory attacks within the nation, Trump replied, “I guess.”
“But I think they're worried about that all the time. We think about it all the time. We plan for it,” he said in the interview published Thursday. “But yeah, you know, we expect some things. Like I said, some people will die. When you go to war, some people will die.”
The FBI is monitoring the threat of Iranian sleeper cells that may be or have been activated in the United States.
On Sunday, a 53-year-old gunman sympathetic to the Islamic regime committed a mass shooting at a bar in Austin, Texas. At least four people, including the gunman, died in the shooting. More than a dozen others were injured.
The FBI is investigating the incident as an act of terrorism after investigators recovered objects belonging to the suspect that point to a “potential nexus to terrorism.”
The suspect, identified as Ndiaga Diagne, wore a hoodie with the words “Property of Allah” and a shirt depicting the Iranian flag during the attack. Diagne was a naturalized American citizen from Senegal.
At least six U.S. service members have been killed since Trump launched “Operation Epic Fury” against Iran last Saturday. There have been hundreds more deaths across the Middle East.
In his latest interview with Time, Trump recounted concerns that Iran would strike first amid a stalled nuclear deal, which is why he accelerated the timeline for the joint U.S.-Israel strikes.
“America First is really about keeping America healthy and well, and not having other countries, you know, hit us,” he said. “There are occasions when you have no choice. This was an occasion.”
Trump also stated his top objectives for the international conflict are to prevent Iran from firing a nuclear weapon or ballistic missiles toward the U.S. and to install a “rational and sane” successor. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the initial airstrikes.
“One of the things I'm going to be asking for is the ability to work with them on choosing a new leader,” Trump told the magazine. “I'm not going through this to end up with another Khamenei. I want to be involved in the selection. They can select, but we have to make sure it's somebody that's reasonable to the United States.”
US WAR IN IRAN IS ‘FULL STEAM AHEAD' WITH CONTINUED BOMBINGS
Following his death, Khamenei is set to be succeeded by his son as the next supreme leader of Iran. Mojtaba Khamenei is presently the favored choice within the clerical regime.
Meanwhile, exiled Iranian Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi wants to lead his native country into the future. His bid, however, is not backed by Trump. The president said he would prefer someone who is popular within Iran as the country's next leader.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
This image from video shows the Trump National Doral in Doral, Fla., June 2, 2017. (AP Photo/Alex Sanz, File)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. imposed travel bans on three Chilean officials over the possible construction of a submarine fiber optic cable with China, while warning Peru against ceding control over a Chinese-built mega port.
Under pressure from President Donald Trump, who had threatened to take the Panama Canal back under U.S. control, the Panamanian government seized two ports at either end of the canal that had been run by a Hong Kong company.
And when the U.S. captured Venezuela's then-President Nicolás Maduro in January, China saw its extensive interests in the oil-rich country suddenly vulnerable.
The Trump administration in recent weeks has taken forceful steps in one Latin American country after another aimed at curbing the influence and economic dominance of China. As part of his quest to restore U.S. preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, the president is hosting Latin American leaders at his golf resort near Miami this weekend for a summit dubbed the “Shield of Americas.”
Supporters of the White House pivot say it is necessary to push back against what they see as China's malign influence on the U.S. doorstep, warning that it could help tip the world order in Beijing's favor. Others question the effectiveness of such a blunt approach when China's interests in Latin America run deep and wide.
Francisco Urdinez, an associate professor at the Political Science Institute of the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, said he worries that Latin American countries will have to pick a side.
“Trump's approach is making hedging increasingly difficult,” he said. “The most likely outcome is a more fragmented region. Right-leaning governments will align more closely with Washington, while left-leaning governments will maintain or deepen ties with China. Countries caught in the middle will try to manage the tension case by case.”
In 2001, Cuba was the only country in the region doing more business with China than with the U.S., according to Urdinez, who tracked the movement of Chinese companies and money in his 2026 book “Economic Displacement: China and the End of US Primacy in Latin America.”
But 20 years later, all South America countries — except Paraguay and Colombia — were trading more with China than with the U.S., according to his research.
“China's core advantage is its economic weight, plain and simple,” he said.
Rebecca Ray, a senior academic researcher at Boston University's Global Development Policy Center, said China has made itself relevant, desirable and even irreplaceable in Latin America in industries where the U.S. has been absent.
“The U.S. did not invest in the industries that the developing world in general is eyeing to close their infrastructure gaps. The U.S. is not investing in green energy; the U.S. is not investing in green mobility,” Ray said. “Meanwhile, over the last 20 years, China has leapfrogged technologically into these new industries, and Chinese companies have had to develop technologies that nobody else has in order to make those industries practical.”
Between 2014 and 2023, China provided loans and grants to countries in Latin America and the Caribbean worth roughly $153 billion — the largest source of official sector financing for the region — compared with approximately $50.7 billion from the U.S., according to AidData, a research lab at William & Mary, a university in Virginia.
In its National Security Strategy released in December, the White House blamed “years of neglect” for the loss of U.S. preeminence in the Western Hemisphere and vowed to deny “non-Hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategically vital assets, in our Hemisphere.”
As China's economic might grew, it gained diplomatic leverage. Since 2016, five countries in the region — Panama, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Nicaragua and Honduras — have broken ties with Taiwan and opened embassies in Beijing in hopes of better economic prospects.
But of the 12 countries in the world that still recognize Taiwan's statehood, seven are in Latin America, reflecting a jostling for influence between the world's two largest economies.
Taiwan is the most sensitive issue in China-U.S. relations. Beijing considers Taiwan to be Chinese territory and vows to annex the island by force if necessary. The U.S. is obligated by law to provide Taiwan with sufficient hardware to deter any armed attack from the mainland.
Beijing sells weapons and police gear to Latin American countries and helps train police and military personnel.
The Chinese-built port in Chancay, Peru, one of the deepest in Latin America, has raised concerns in Washington that China could use it for military purposes.
“President Trump is right to focus on defending the Western Hemisphere from China,” said Rep. John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. “President Trump has made it clear we stand with our friends in the region against China's efforts to undermine America's interests.”
Latin America wants to look beyond China for its economic prosperity, and the U.S. has a lot of offer, said Enrique Millán-Mejía, senior fellow on economic development at the Atlantic Council's Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.
“There is some discontent about the presence of China as an investor and how the footprint and the outcome of those investments has not been significantly positive for the economy, and they are trying to align more with the U.S. — with the promise that the U.S. might invest in strategic sectors,” Millán-Mejía said.
He cautioned that China maintains a big advantage because it already has invested in strategic sectors, including infrastructure, security, logistics and technology. But he expects Latin American countries to be pragmatic and take the best of a relationship with both the U.S. and China.
“Certainly, for Latin America, it's very important to have a very good and close relationship with the U.S., because the U.S. is very near to them. But obviously, from an economic standpoint, it's good to keep at least trade relations with China,” Millán-Mejía said.
Sun Yun, director of the China program at the Stimson Center, a Washington think tank, said China was focused on doing business in Latin America.
“There's no competition with the U.S. for dominance from the Chinese view,” Sun said. “They will prioritize protection of their assets and will not give up facilities such as a port without a fight.”
She said China expects something in return.
“What they are trying to do is to argue that Taiwan is fairly and squarely in China's sphere of influence,” Sun said. “If the U.S. expects China to respect its own definition, then the U.S. should also respect China's definition of the Western Pacific, especially Taiwan, to be a core national interest for China.”
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.
Every time Jennifer publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Enter your email
By clicking “Sign up”, you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
The private credit market has been generating some nerve-racking headlines lately.
Questions about the health of the booming sector are growing louder amid a flood of redemption requests among some high-profile private credit funds.
The latest news has added to concerns that were kicked off late last year. While private markets appear steady overall, investors are growing increasingly worried that cracks could be forming at a time when more retail investors are being invited into the market.
Here's a rundown of everything that's happened lately to cause jitters to spike.
Date: March 6
What happened: The world's largest asset manager said it was capping withdrawals from its HPS Corporate Lending Fund, a $26 billion private credit fund that received $1.2 billion in redemption requests in the first quarter.
First reported by the Financial Times, the fund said it was paying out $620 million of those requests, or 5% of its net asset value. That meets a threshold after which BlackRock is allowed to restrict further withdrawals, a letter to investors said.
BlackRock shares dropped 5% on Friday amid a broader risk-off move in the market.
BlackRock declined to comment on changes to the fund beyond the letter posted on its website.
Date: March 2-3
What happened: Blackstone is the latest firm to draw heightened scrutiny to the private credit market. The private equity giant was hit with a wave of redemption requests from a private credit fund offered to retail investors.
Bloomberg reported on Tuesday that, in an unusual move, the firm tapped more than 25 top executives to raise $150 million in order to meet the flood of requests.
Speaking to CNBC, Blackstone president Jon Gray said he believed investors may be motivated to withdraw their funds due to the "constant spin cycle" over recent private credit failures.
"When that's happening, it's not a surprise that investors can get nervous, financial advisors can say 'Hey, I want to redeem,'" Gray said on Tuesday.
Date: February 20
What happened: Business Insider reported that Blue Owl failed to secure a loan for Coreweave's $4 billion data center.
An executive familiar with large data center financing told Business Insider that Blue Owl faced limited interest in the data center due to hesitation from other lenders and investors who were concerned about exposure to AI firms with weaker credit. Coreweave has a credit rating of B+, according to S&P Global, below investment grade.
The report followed others that have suggested lenders are growing skittish over data center deals being cut in private markets.
Last December, negotiations between Blue Owl and Oracle to build a $10 billion data center stalled, sources told the Financial Times.
In a statement, Oracle told Business Insider that the details in the FT story were "incorrect."
"Our development partner, Related Digital, selected the best equity partner from a competitive group of options, which in this instance was not Blue Owl. Final negotiations for their equity deal are moving forward on schedule and according to plan," Michael Egbert, a spokesperson for the software giant, told Business Insider in December.
Date: February 19
What happened: Famed economist Mohamed El-Erian said he believed Blue Owl's move was a warning for financial markets.
In a LinkedIn post, the chief economic advisor at Allianz said the firm's decision to halt redemptions could be a "canary-in-the-coalmine" moment that could hint at risks to the broader financial system.
He added that he believed the "investing phenomenon" in private markets had gone too far.
"There's also the 'elephant in the room' question regarding much larger system risks (nowhere near the magnitude of those which fueled the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, but a significant — and necessary — valuation hit is looming for specific assets)," El-Erian wrote.
Date: February 18
What happened: The Financial Times reported that Blue Owl permanently froze redemptions on its Capital Corporation II fund, a private debt fund it had opened to retail investors.
The firm said investors in the fund would no longer be able to cash out their investments on a quarterly basis, but would instead receive periodic payments as Blue Owl sells its assets over time.
Online, the move sparked comparisons to how some debt funds froze withdrawals leading up to the Great Financial Crisis.
Speaking to CNBC after the initial reports, Craig Packer, co-president and the company's head of credit, said he believed media coverage about the fund's changes was misleading.
"We're not halting redemptions, just changing the form, and if anything, we're accelerating redemptions," Packer said.
Date: October 14
What happened: Jamie Dimon, one of Wall Street's most influential bankers, said he was watching for more signs of trouble in private credit on an earnings call with investors.
"When you see one cockroach, there's probably more," the JPMorgan boss said, adding that his firm would "scour" its underwriting and other procedures after the collapse of First Brands and Tricolor.
"Asset prices are high, a lot of credit stuff that you would see out there, you will only see in a downturn," Dimon added, noting that the US credit space had looked "benign" for years.
Other figures on Wall Street have also warned of more trouble in the sector in recent months.
Apollo CEO Marc Rowan said he saw a potential "shakeout" in private credit when speaking at the Bloomberg Invest Conference on Tuesday.
Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman Sachs' former CEO, also doubled down this week on his view that financial markets could soon face a "reckoning," potentially stemming from private credit.
Date: February 11
What happened: Investors grew more nervous about private lending as UBS speculated that defaults could soar in a severe "AI disruption" scenario.
In a note to clients last month, strategists at the bank said they lifted their forecasts for private credit defaults. In a scenario where AI disrupts the business world at a "rapid and aggressive" pace, the bank said it sees the private credit default rate potentially rising as high 15%.
In its analysis, UBS pointed to how AI disruption fears had sparked a deep sell-off in software stocks, one area of the market with large exposure to private credit. Software accounts for around 40% of all private equity-backed loans outstanding, according to a recent Bloomberg analysis.
"I do think, though, software is a big stick. You know, the credit market has had all these sticks being dropped on it, and one day, it'll really buckle," Victor Khosla, the CIO of Strategic Value Partners, said at the time.
Date: September 10-24
What happened: Anxiety about the private credit sector picked up after subprime auto lender Tricolor Holdings and auto parts company First Brands declared bankruptcy late last year. Tricolor was the first to go under, filing for bankruptcy on September 10, with First Brands following several weeks later.
In December, federal prosecutors in New York unsealed an indictment that charged Tricolor's founder, Daniel Chu, with bank fraud, wire fraud, and other offenses. In a statement, the US Attorney's Office said Tricolor's executives had attempted to "manipulate the characteristics of collateral to make ineligible, near-worthless assets appear to meet lender requirements."
In January, prosecutors unsealed an indictment revealing similar charges against First Brands' CEO, Patrick James, and his brother, a senior executive at the firm. Prosecutors alleged that the pair "perpetrated a yearslong fraud" that culminated in First Brands' bankruptcy.
Jump to
In this article
Marvell shares ripped 20% higher on Friday as the company posted an earnings beat and issued strong guidance, expecting robust artificial intelligence demand to continue.
The semiconductor company reported adjusted earnings of 80 cents per share for the quarter, exceeding the 79 cents per share expected by analysts polled by LSEG. The company reported $2.2 billion in fourth-quarter revenue, topping a forecast of $2.1 billion.
"Look at our results that we're guiding. Look at our outlook for this year. Look at our outlook for next year. Do you see me blinking? You don't," CEO Matt Murphy told analysts on the earnings call.
Murphy said in a release that the company expects year-over-year revenue growth to accelerate in each quarter of 2027.
For Q1 2027, the chipmaker expects revenue of $2.4 billion, +/-5%. Wall Street expected $2.27 billion.
The company's revenue for data centers in fiscal 2026 surpassed $6 billion, an increase of 46% from last year.
Marvell completed acquisitions of Celestial AI and XConn Technologies last month. Murphy told analysts on the earnings call that the acquisitions are expected to add $250 million in aggregate revenue for fiscal 2028.
The company forecasted $14.48 billion in revenue and earnings of $5.35 per share for fiscal 2028.
Analyst reactions to the earnings were largely positive.
"Overall, we are impressed with the strong multi-year revenue outlook and the diversity of customer program ramps," J.P. Morgan analyst Harlan Sur wrote in a note Friday.
The bank reiterated its overweight rating on the stock and upped its price target from $130 to $135.
CNBC's Kristina Partsinevelos contributed to this report.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
U.S. Customs and Border Protection told a Court of International Trade judge on Friday that it is not currently able to comply with his order to begin refunding reciprocal tariffs imposed last year by President Donald Trump, which the Supreme Court recently ruled are illegal.
CPB in a court filing cited its existing technology, processes and manpower requirements as the reasons it could not immediately comply with the conditions of Judge Richard Eaton's order. But the agency also suggested it could begin issuing refunds by late April after revamping its technology.
CBP told Eaton in the same filing that the total amount of so-called IEEPA tariffs collected as of Wednesday by the agency and estimated duty deposits related to such tariffs "is approximately $166 billion."
The filing came as Eaton was set to hold a hearing on the refund issue at the Court of International Trade in New York City. Eaton has been designated as the only CIT judge who will hear cases from importers seeking refunds on Trump's tariffs.
CBP in the filing said it "confident that it can develop and implement" new functionality in its Automated Commercial Environment —the system for tracking imported merchandise – "that will streamline and consolidate refunds and interest payments on an importer basis," instead of issuing more than 54 million separate refunds.
"CBP is making all possible efforts to have this new ACE functionality ready for use in 45 days," the agency said. "This new process will require minimal submission from importers."
The agency said it estimates that changing the ACE system "will save CBP over 4 million hours" of work by employees.
Brandon Lord, executive director of the trade programs directorate at CBP's Office of Trade, in the filing said that as of Wednesday, more than 330,000 importers have made a total of over 53 millionentries "in which they have deposited or paid duties imposed pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act."
Eaton on Wednesday ordered CPB to calculate the cost of bringing in shipments into the United States without assessing a tariff, and told the agency to make refunds to importers who had paid the IEEPA tariffs, with interest.
"Customs knows how to do this," Eaton said during a court hearing on Wednesday. "They do it every day. They liquidate entries and make refunds."
In the filing Wednesday by CBP's Lord, the agency indicated that its existing technology was making it impossible to immediately comply with Eaton's order.
"In light of the Court's March 5, 2026 amended order, CBP is now facing an unprecedented volume of refunds. Its existing administrative procedures and technology are not well suited to a task of this scale and will require manual work that will prevent personnel from fully carrying out the agency's trade enforcement mission," the filing said.
"Personnel would be redirected from responsibilities that serve to mitigate imminent threats to national security and economic security," the agency said.
Many importers have sued the Trump administration seeking refunds of tariffs they have paid since last year that were deemed illegal.
Eaton's order on the refunds was issued in a lawsuit filed by one of those importers, Atmus Filtration, but it applies to every duty that was paid in connection with the IEEPA tariffs.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
Every time Jennifer publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Enter your email
By clicking “Sign up”, you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
The market has one thing on its mind this week: How much higher can oil prices climb?
Crude prices have ripped higher all week as the war with Iran continued, sparking concern among investors that there could be serious consequences for the economy if oil stays elevated.
Brent crude, the international benchmark, rose more than 6% to top $90 a barrel on Friday, its highest level since 2024, as investors digested Iran's recent attack on an oil tanker and Donald Trump's latest comments signaling the war could drag on.
April contracts for West Texas Intermediate crude, meanwhile, climbed another 7% to $87 a barrel, its highest level since October 2023.
Investors have dumped stocks all this week, panicking as crude is a key input in the outlook for economic activity.
Every time Jennifer publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Stay connected to Jennifer and get more of their work as it publishes.
By clicking "Sign up", you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
The rise in oil prices has sparked some comparisons to the oil price shocks of the 1970s. Soaring crude prices at the time led to stagflation, a scenario in which inflation soars while the economy remains sluggish.
Market pros are mostly expecting the rise in prices to be short-lived, but are eyeing a few levels that could signal more dire consequences for the US economy.
Here are the thresholds they're eyeing, and what each level could mean.
First, it's possible that oil prices are already at a level where more serious economic consequences are imminent.
Oil prices breaking "meaningfully" above the $80 mark and staying there for several weeks would start to lift the inflation outlook, Nic Puckrin, a lead market analyst at Coin Bureau, wrote in a note this week.
"If oil surges above $90 and remains elevated as energy infrastructure disruption intensifies, this could quickly become a longer-term structural shift," Puckrin wrote.
$100 a barrel, or a 12% increase from where Brent traded on Friday, would mark a true oil price shock, according to José Torres, a senior economist at Interactive Brokers.
Should oil prices hit that level, markets can expect to see an inflationary response similar to what happened after Russia invaded Ukraine, he told Business Insider this week, referring to how consumer prices grew as fast as 9% year-over-year in the US alongside a rise in energy prices.
In such a scenario, Torres said he saw inflation rising back up to 3%. The outlook for Fed rate cuts would also be derailed, while the risks of stagflation would increase, he said.
"That's the risk here. So we can have a down year," Torres added of the potential impact on stocks.
Mike Wilson, the CIO at Morgan Stanley and a major bull on Wall Street, also said he sees $100 a barrel as the level that could upend his bull case for stocks. That's largely due to the impact of oil prices on economic growth, he said, citing his team's analysis of the historical performance of the stock market after a spike in oil prices.
Oil hitting $100 a barrel would push its year-over-year gains to the 75%-100% range, a territory that historically has led stocks to underperform, Morgan Stanley wrote in a client note this week.
"The bear case scenario for stocks related to this past weekend's events in Iran and across the Middle East would be if oil prices were to rise sharply/persistently, thereby posing a risk to the duration of the business cycle," Wilson added.
Oil hitting $120 a barrel, a 34% increase from Brent's current levels, could be the trigger for a US recession, according to Bruce Richards, the CEO of Marathon Asset Management.
Speaking at the Bloomberg Invest conference on Wednesday, Richards pointed to the potential for higher oil prices to create a stagflationary environment.
"$120 for Brent, you're at zero growth. That's the trigger for a recession," Richards said. "That's what I believe. And I believe that's what the markets believe, although no one said it yet," he added.
Nobel economist Paul Krugman also predicted negative consequences if oil prices were to rise to $120 a barrel. A price spike of that magnitude could raise headline inflation figures by about 1 percentage point and raise recession risks, he said.
Krugman said he wasn't expecting a change in oil prices to spark a recession or "runaway inflation" on its own, but suggested that the risks would be skewed more towards the downside. He pointed to other pressures already weighing on the US economy, like a weaker job market.
"There are many stresses on our economy, and this could be the straw that breaks the camel's back — a straw that becomes heavier the longer the war goes on," he wrote in a Substack post this week.
Jump to
In this article
The chief executive of drugmaker Zealand Pharma sought to calm investors about the latest trial results, which showed patients lost less weight than expected and prompted the stock to fall more than 35%.
Speaking to CNBC, CEO Adam Steensberg criticized what he called the "weight loss Olympics," where markets and companies focus too heavily on the amount of weight lost, rather than on factors such as staying on the medicine long-term and dealing with side effects.
The world doesn't need these products that amount to very high rates of weight loss, he said, referring to medicines developed by Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly. The latest trial had also not been optimized for maximum weight loss, he added.
"I need to focus on what the patients need, not what the current market like to see," Steensberg said. "We have for a long time called to end the weight loss Olympics."
Zealand is developing the drug petrelintide in partnership with Swiss pharma heavyweight Roche. Mid-stage trial results released after the closing bell on Thursday showed the drug led to an average weight reduction of 10.7% over 42 weeks. Analysts had largely expected between 13% and 20% weight loss.
Shares of Zealand were last seen trading 35% lower, on track for their worst day ever and the lowest close since August 2023. Shares of Roche fell 3%.
Addressing weight maintenance, rather than losing the most amount of weight quickly, has emerged as a way for companies to differentiate themselves as they try to enter the lucrative weight-loss drug market, which has been estimated to be worth as much as $150 billion by 2030.
Steensberg said he was "extremely certain" there would be a shift in the industry "towards tolerability," referring to how well patients can cope with side effects of the medications.
"I think very, very soon, people start to realize that it's not about that weight loss number, it's about how you achieve that weight loss number."
"If you then look into real world, you will actually discover that most patients who are on treatment today with the current products never get to those numbers that we see in clinical studies," because "in a real-world setting, people cannot tolerate it," he said, referring to Novo Nordisk's and Eli Lilly's drugs already on the market.
Petrelintide is an amylin analog that targets a hormone produced in the pancreas that affects appetite and slows gastric emptying, rather than the GLP-1 or GIP gut hormones targeted by weight-loss treatments currently on the market, such as Novo's Wegovy and Lilly's Zepbound.
A majority of patients on Novo's Wegovy experience some form of side effects, most commonly gastrointestinal, such as nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. Most are mild to moderate and transient. The trend is similar for Lilly's Zepbound.
A Novo spokesperson said that direct comparisons between trials are challenging because of variations in study design and reporting practices. A study of a high-dose semaglutide, the active ingredient in Wegovy and Ozempic, found that patients lost up to 21% of their weight, with only 5.4% ending the treatment due to side effects, the spokesperson said. Only 3.3% discontinued the treatment due to gastrointestinal side effects.
Lilly didn't respond to a CNBC request for comment.
In the trial results, Zealand said that at the maximum dose of petrelintide, there were "no cases of vomiting and no treatment discontinuations due to gastrointestinal adverse events." The trial involved 493 people living with overweight and obesity.
It also has a drug under development that combines petrelintide with the Roche-developed CT-388, a GLP-1/GIP receptor, which Zealand says may be a better option for patients needing to lose a large amount of weight.
One study of more than 125,000 patients suggested that about 50% of people with obesity discontinue appetite-modifying GLP-1 medications within a year. High costs and side effects are common reasons for stopping.
A study published in the British Medical Journal in January found that people who lost weight with the help of GLP-1 drugs, regained weight significantly faster after stopping than those who lost weight with diet and exercise.
Obese patients who stopped GLP-1 medications were projected to return to their starting weight after 1.7 years, the study found, compared with 3.9 years for those who lost weight with behavioral change alone.
The rate at which patients lose weight on drugs has been a key factor driving stock prices for Novo and Lilly in recent years.
Novo shares are trading 75% below their peak in mid-2024, while Lilly shares have risen over the same period as its medicines were shown to deliver a higher rate of weight loss.
On Friday, Jefferies analysts said petrelintide had potential for Wegovy-like efficacy and tolerability on par with placebo which "suggests this is a viable drug."
But they added it was likely to be viewed as a second-best to the amylin treatment being developed by Lilly.
"For us as a small company, to be among the leading products in a new category... is a very nice place to be," said Steensberg, adding that it was early to make such calls.
"If you look historically at the markets, if you're among the three first who launch into a new category with an attractive profile, you will become a very significant player in that category."
He added that the latest trial hadn't been optimized to maximize weight loss, as it had an almost 50/50 gender distribution, and that women tend to lose more weight than men.
"Most companies would approach that with 70% females," he said, adding he was "confident" petrelintide would lead to a weight loss in the mid-teens once they have optimized starting conditions.
The trial results published Thursday were about "finding the doses and then demonstrating the safety and solid ability," he said.
Zealand said it expected to initiate a Phase 3 study later this year. But Barclays analysts said that the market was unlikely to credit a Phase 3 "fix" for petrelintide in two years.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
A difficult jobs report comes at a tough time for the White House. Gas prices are rising due to the war in Iran, while stock market turmoil is making savers and retirees antsy about the state of their 401(k)s.
Data released Friday showing a loss of 92,000 jobs in February will put pressure on the Trump administration to reconsider military and homeland security policies that have complicated the nation's economic outlook. But there may simply not be enough time to force through a substantial policy shift that could improve the economic outlook before the November midterms.
The state of the economy is mixed. The unemployment rate rose to 4.4% in February, reversing a decline from the month before. That rate is still low in historical terms. Meanwhile wages rose 3.8% since the year before, helping to reverse workers' losses in purchasing power from high inflation under the Biden administration.
The rosy-tinted view of this report is that it shows an economy in rough stasis, with good prospects for improvement. Healthy businesses don't need to expand now because they are becoming more productive, and they aren't conducting mass layoffs. And with a crackdown on illegal immigration well underway, it is no surprise that a good number of people are leaving the workforce.
"You can have strong output and not really, you know, magnificent job growth, if there's a big gain of productivity," Kevin Hassett, top White House economic advisor, said on CNBC's "Squawk Box" on Friday.
But that high-level message might not land well for people who have watched gas prices jump nearly 23 cents in just a week, according to AAA. Captains of ships carrying oil and other energy supplies are reluctant to pass through the Strait of Hormuz while missiles are flying. That has pushed the price of oil above $90 a barrel for Brent crude as of Friday morning. It was near $72.50 a week ago, before the Iran operation started. The last time oil topped $100 a barrel was in 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine.
Stocks have fallen as investors ingest the possibility of those higher energy prices pushing up inflation. The S&P 500 dropped 1.5% as trading opened Friday morning. That could prompt the Federal Reserve under Chair Jerome Powell to rethink lowering interest rates, as President Donald Trump has repeatedly demanded he do.
"It's high time for the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates and stop foolishly strangling America's economic resurgence under President Trump," White House spokesman Kush Desai told CNBC on Friday.
For now, the administration isn't expressing much concern. There has been "no discussion" of releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Hassett said on CNBC.
Trump in a social media post Friday said he wasn't considering any kind of quick deal with Iran to end the fighting. "There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!," he wrote.
But economic data such as the jobs report will make that position difficult to sustain. Americans may well ask why the U.S. is paying an economic and military cost in Iran, since Trump said prior airstrikes in June destroyed the country's nuclear program. The new joint U.S.-Israeli operation killed Iran's longtime supreme leader. Why keep going?
At this point, it may not be up to the U.S. With Iran still between leaders, it isn't clear who could make a ceasefire deal, even if one were viable. And Iran's military forces have little left to lose in attacking U.S. interests, including energy supplies. The threat of an all-out U.S. attack was one reason Iranians held off retaliating against the U.S. in previous episodes. That bridge has now been thoroughly burned.
It may be easier for Trump to pivot on immigration. The crackdown in Minneapolis produced enough political blowback for Trump to soften his approach. Now he has a chance to do so nationwide. On Thursday he fired Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and named Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., her expected replacement. An immigration approach that focuses on apprehending dangerous criminals and steers clear of raiding businesses might help the labor market's loss of workers.
The lower interest rates Trump wants are in reach, too. Fed chair nominee Kevin Warsh would likely cut rates regardless of the oil shock, in large part because he believes in that productivity story, too. But to get Warsh into office, Trump needs to end an investigation into Powell that has prompted Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., to stand in the way of advancing any Fed nominees. Trump and U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro have so far shown no sign of budging.
An overall Trump administration push to improve the economic outlook could make some headway, though how long it would take to show up in the numbers is anyone's guess. But it would require a level of political coordination and strategic discipline that Trump has struggled with in his second term. The pace of events will only make that more difficult.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
In this article
DETROIT — Toyota Motor, Hyundai Motor and Chinese automakers such as Chery face the most potential impact of non-domestic automakers from the U.S.-Israel war with Iran, according to an analysis by Bernstein.
Those international automakers account for roughly a third of sales in the Middle East, according to the report, led by Toyota at 17%, Hyundai at 10% and Chery at 5%. In Iran specifically, Bernstein reports Iranian automakers Iran Khodro and SAIPA lead, followed by Chery with a 6% market share.
Other Chinese carmakers also are expected to be impacted, as the Middle East has become a growing destination for Chinese auto exports. Bernstein, citing China export data, said the region accounted for about 17% of China's passenger vehicle exports in 2025.
The Bernstein report notes that while sales in the region will be impacted, the closing of the Strait of Hormuz, which links the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Indian Ocean, and rising oil prices will have ripple effects across the global automotive industry.
"Closure of the Strait of Hormuz adds 10-14 days to transit times," Bernstein analyst Eunice Lee said in a Wednesday investor note, adding "a prolonged conflict and closure of the strait would hurt sales, increase logistics costs, and delay deliveries."
Roughly 20 million barrels of crude oil travel through the strait every day, according to consulting firm AlixPartners. It's also a "critical passage" for vehicle and parts shipments to the Middle East, Bernstein noted.
Bernstein said any effect on Japanese automakers "appears limited for now, but close monitoring of developments is still required." It also said, of the European automakers, Chrysler and Jeep parent Stellantis "seems to have the largest exposure in light of its overall issues."
"The impact of rising gasoline pump prices is already being seen in Stellantis' 11% stock price slump since its close last Friday – making so sharp a pivot to gas guzzling HEMI V8 engines and writing off its electrification efforts seems particularly inauspiciously timed at the moment," Lee wrote.
U.S. crude oil prices on Friday topped $90 per barrel, and retail gasoline prices in the U.S. have jumped nearly 27 cents in the last week through Thursday to $3.25 per gallon on average, according to the motorist group AAA.
Stellantis this week said it is "closely monitoring developments across the affected countries," noting it's "not yet possible to fully assess the potential impact on local operations."
Toyota, in an emailed statement, said it does "not conduct business in Iran and do not have any resident employees there." The company said it is "closely monitoring the situation and prioritizing the safety of our local resident employees in the Middle East and related parties."
Hyundai and Chery did not immediately respond for requests for comment.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
San Francisco Federal Reserve President Mary Daly said Friday the weak February jobs report adds to a difficult policymaking environment.
In a CNBC interview, Daly did not commit to a position on interest rates, but said a softening labor market combined with inflation still running above the central bank's 2% target complicate future decisions.
"This jobs market report has got my attention," she said during a "Squawk Box" interview. "I don't think you can look through this report, but I also don't think you should make more of it than one month of data."
The Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday reported that nonfarm payrolls declined by 92,000 in February, against expectations for a gain of 50,000 and third jobs decrease in the past five months.
With concerns rising about the labor market, the Fed cut its benchmark interest rate three times in the latter part of 2025 and has taken a more cautious approach since then with inflation still above target and threatened by the Iran war.
"It's a very different universe than when we have inflation below our target," said Daly, referencing the cuts in 2019 when prices were tame. "But right now we have inflation printing above target. It's been printing above target for some time, so it's really a balance of risks calculation, and I hope the 75 basis points we did last year would put a floor underneath the labor market."
Following the report, futures traders raised odds for rate cuts, pulling forward the next one to July and raising the probability for two reductions by the end of the year.
"I think the important thing is that it's really hard to hike right now in a world where ... we don't have any evidence that [the labor market is] quite steady. So I think we just need more time," she said.
Daly does not get a vote this year on the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee but will vote again in 2027.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
In this article
President Donald Trump said Friday in a social media post that there would be no deal to end the U.S. war against Iran without an "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER" by Iran.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped more than 900 points, or nearly 2%, after Trump's demand, which he wrote on Truth Social. The S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite fell 1.6% each.
Trump said that after a surrender and "the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before."
"IRAN WILL HAVE A GREAT FUTURE. "MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN (MIGA!)" Trump wrote.
The futures price of the global benchmark Brent crude oil rose, breaking $90 per barrel, after Trump posted his demand.
Qatar's energy minister, Saad al-Kaabi, warned Friday that rising oil prices due to the war against Iran "could bring down the economies of the world."
Al-Kaabi told The Financial Times that crude oil prices could hit as high as $150 per barrel within weeks if tankers cannot pass through the Strait of Hormuz. The last time oil topped $100 a barrel was when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.
Trump's demand came as Iran has yet to pick a leader to replace Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed last weekend in an airstrike at the beginning of the war by the U.S. and Israel.
Trump in June made an identical demand of "UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER" by Iran in another social media post as he considered launching a military strike against that nation.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
BOSTON — United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby said the spike in fuel prices since the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Saturday will have a "meaningful" impact on the carrier's financial results this quarter, but he added that demand has been resilient.
Jet fuel, airlines' biggest expense after labor, has surged 58% since last Friday, going for $3.95 a gallon on Thursday, according to the Argus U.S. Jet Fuel Index.
"If it continues we'll feel it in Q2 also," Kirby said after an event Thursday afternoon where he discussed the future of air travel at Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences.
United, like most major U.S. carriers, doesn't hedge fuel, a practice where airlines or other companies lock in prices using futures contracts or other products. A Boeing 737-800 can hold 6,875 gallons of fuel, according to a manufacturer guide.
"No one hedges anymore and even if you do, hedging the crack spread is really hard to do," Kirby said. The crack spread is the difference between the price of crude oil and products like gasoline.
When asked when the higher fuel costs will start affecting airfares, Kirby said it will "probably start quick."
He added that travel demand has been resilient over all, with booked revenue up 20% from a year ago. Demand "has not taken even a tiny step back," he said.
Kirby spoke less than two weeks before airlines are set to attend a closely watched JPMorgan industry conference where airline executives often update their financial outlooks.
His comments are an early sign of how global airlines are impacted by the war, which left more than a million people stranded after over 25,000 flights were canceled, forcing customers to find alternatives to flight chaos in the Middle East.
A new segment is emerging for United because so many customers have been caught up in airspace closures and massive flight cancellations in the Middle East since Saturday's attacks and other strikes throughout the week.
Dubai International Airport in the United Arab Emirates is the busiest international airport in the world, according to the Airports Council International, while Hamad International Airport that serves Doha, Qatar, is another major hub.
The airports are gateways to millions of passengers flying to and from destinations that span Australia, India, Europe and North America. But customers have been forced to avoid the Middle East amid airspace closures.
"Each day this week, we have booked over 1,000 people from Australia and New Zealand to Europe. Last year, we booked less than one a day," Kirby said, adding that Europe is the strongest region in the world for bookings now.
United is also in talks with the Trump administration for potential charter flights to get citizens out of the Middle East, Kirby said, but that plans haven't been set yet.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
In this article
While the U.S. war with Iran is playing out thousands of miles away, American consumers are already feeling financial ripple effects.
The U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran over the weekend gave way to a week with topsy-turvy markets, spiking mortgage rates and higher prices at the pump. These changes can drag on already-lackluster consumer sentiment while further elevating affordability as a leading political issue.
"Wars are never good for consumer sentiment," said Mark Brennan, an associate professor at New York University's Stern School of Business. "They might be good for munitions, manufacturers and lobbyists and all these clowns, but not good for the average consumer."
An average gallon of gas in the U.S. hit $3.25 on Thursday, according to AAA. The one-week jump of 27 cents is similar to what was seen during the onset of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the organization said.
Gas' 8.5% increase over three days is the largest since Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans in 2005, according to an analysis from Bespoke Investment Group.
With Friday's jump in oil prices, gas prices are set to climb even further. Gasoline futures trading in New York were up another 2% on Friday.
To be sure, consumers had been feeling some relief on oil prices before this week's shock. The average price of a gallon fell to its lowest level since 2021 late last year, according to AAA.
The 30-year mortgage rate jumped above 6.1% this week, according to Mortgage News Daily. The popular fixed-rate loan had previously traded below 6%, which was around multiyear lows.
Mortgage rates broadly track the 10-year Treasury yield, which climbed back above 4% this week in the wake of the attack on Iran. Higher oil prices are raising concerns in the bond market about inflation revving back up, driving yields higher.
Stocks whipsawed this week, which can add to uncertainty felt by consumers who either actively trade stocks or have exposure to the market by way of retirement plans.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell nearly 800 points on Thursday as U.S. crude oil broke above $80 per barrel, reigniting concerns about how the war could hamper markets. The blue-chip average has lost more than 2% this week, while the broad S&P 500 shed 0.7%.
If U.S. crude prices climb above $100 per barrel, a global recession could ensue, according to Dan Niles. But such a scenario isn't likely to play out, the founder of Niles Investment Management said in an interview on CNBC's "Power Lunch," as he anticipates the conflict will only last about a month.
These ripple effects can intensify the woes Americans have been feeling since runaway inflation seen during the pandemic weakened their financial footing. Consumer sentiment has tumbled near record lows in recent months, according to the University of Michigan's closely followed Surveys of Consumers.
Even before the war rattled markets, growing economic inequality and the high cost of living had already made affordability a political buzzword this year as Americans head to the polls for midterm elections.
"Wars put everybody ill at ease," Brennan said. "It's hard to paint a rosy scenario coming out of any of this stuff."
— CNBC's Sean Conlon, Pia Singh and Diana Olick contributed reporting.
The Morning Squawk newsletter by Alex Harring is your rundown of five things to know before the stock market opens.
Subscribe here to get access today.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
In this article
President Donald Trump is ready to use the U.S. Navy to escort oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz as the war against Iran rages, but providing safe passage to the volume of traffic that typically passes through the waterway will prove challenging.
U.S. oil prices have surged 28% to above $86 a barrel this week as Iran attacks tankers, effectively bringing ship traffic through the Strait to a standstill. Brent crude is up 22% this week to $89 a barrel.
Global benchmark Brent would shoot above $100 per barrel if the waterway is closed for a prolonged period, Wall Street analysts say. At that level, oil prices could tip the global economy into a recession, they say.
The narrow Strait is the only way for tankers to enter and exit the Persian Gulf. More than 14 million barrels per day of crude passed through the Strait in 2025, about a third of all the oil that is exported by ship worldwide, according to energy consulting firm Kpler.
About 100 tankers and cargo vessels pass through the Strait daily under normal conditions, said Matt Smith, an oil analyst at Kpler, and about 400 tankers are currently stuck in the Gulf due to the war.
"There's hundreds and hundreds of vessels still in the Mideast Gulf," said Matt Wright, a senior freight analyst, also at Kpler. The U.S. Navy would take "an inordinate amount of time to escort them even a few at a time."
Trump's promise to escort tankers if necessary, and provide political risk insurance to their owners, helped calm the oil market Tuesday and Wednesday.
But prices surged Thursday after Iran said it attacked a tanker with a missile. The British Navy, meanwhile, reported a large explosion at a tanker anchored in Iraqi territorial waters.
"A key question will be whether there are enough Navy assets to both escort ships as well as continue operations against Iran," Helima Croft, head of global commodity strategy at RBC Capital Markets, told clients in a Tuesday note.
Insurance isn't really the issue for ship owners, Wright at Kpler said. Tankers are not moving because they are worried about their physical security, he said, and ship owners will need to a see a sustained period without attacks to venture through the Strait again.
The urgency to recover oil flows from the Gulf is high, Wright said. But "there needs to be some confidence that Iran's ability to continue to wage war has diminished," the analyst said.
Houthi militants in Yemen disrupted Red Sea traffic with missile attacks for more than a year, starting in late 2023. "They're nothing compared to the sophistication of the Iranians, so it is a very different, threat," Wright said.
U.S. naval escorts help at the margin but by themselves will not re-open the Strait, Rapidan Energy analysts said in a note on Wednesday. Instead, the U.S. needs to systematically degrade Iran's military capabilities, which takes time, they said.
The U.S. Navy escorted tankers through the Strait in 1987 when commercial vessels became targets during the Iran-Iraq war, said Croft. But the U.S. military at that time was not simultaneously waging war against the regime in Tehran and guaranteeing safe passage to ships, she said.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright said Wednesday that the Trump administration will provide naval escorts "as soon as we can."
"Right now our Navy and our military is focused on other things, which is disarming this Iranian regime that's been striking out at all of its neighbors and Americans in every way it can," Wright told Fox News.
"In the not too distant future, we'll be able to use the Navy to get energy flowing again, but in the meantime markets are very well supplied," he said.
The Trump administration does not have a timeline for when the Strait will be safe for commercial shipping again, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Wednesday.
"I don't want to commit to a timeline, but certainly it's something that is being calculated actively by both the Department of War and the Department of Energy," Leavitt said during a briefing.
The longer tankers are penned into the Gulf, the bigger the problem becomes for the global oil market, according to analysts.
The Gulf countries could exhaust their storage capacity as barrels build up with nowhere to go, said Natasha Kaneva, head of global commodities research at JPMorgan. That will force them to shut down production, potentially spiking Brent to $120 per barrel, Kaneva said in a Sunday note.
Iraqi officials told Reuters on Tuesday that Iraq has already cut production by 1.5 million barrels per day as it runs out of storage due to the Hormuz closure. Production shutdowns could double in four days, Kaneva said Tuesday.
"With the Strait of Hormuz still inactive, the clock is ticking," Kaneva said.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
Skip the noise. Get the download.
In this article
This report is from this week's The Tech Download newsletter. Like what you see? You can subscribe here.
Banking, payments, enterprise and consumer services in the UAE experienced outages earlier this week as AWS (Amazon Web Services) data centers in the country were hit by Iranian drone strikes on Sunday.
Many of the apps have since come back online after companies scrambled to migrate servers, but the downtime of services that many use daily highlights how digital infrastructure has become a strategic target.
After the U.S. and Israel launched joint strikes on Iran last weekend, Tehran's wave of retaliatory attacks across the Middle East targeted military bases, oil and gas production facilities and data centers.
There are over 200 of these across the Middle East, according to some estimates, and cheap energy and land have drawn U.S. hyperscalers to pour resources into building out capacity in the region in recent years.
"Iran and proxies have targeted oil fields in the past, but their attacks this week on UAE data centers shows they are now considered critical infrastructure," Patrick J. Murphy, executive director of the geopolitical unit at advisory firm Hilco Global, told me.
On Monday, AWS said that two of its facilities in the UAE had been directly hit by drones, with one in Bahrain also damaged by a nearby strike.
The latter was targeted by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps for the company's support of the U.S. military, Iranian state media said on Wednesday.
Companies using AWS servers in the UAE were advised to migrate to alternative regions as they raced to limit disruption. AWS was still reporting services in the country as "disrupted" on Friday morning.
Governments have been increasingly acknowledging the strategic importance of data centers in recent years. The U.S. recognizes them as part of its 16 critical infrastructure sectors; the U.K. designated them as critical national infrastructure in 2024; and the EU also gives them special status. Many other nations across Europe and further afield also classify data centers as critical.
But the rise of drone warfare in recent years has brought new scrutiny to the security of the infrastructure that powers digital life across the globe.
Iran targeting data centers in the Middle East could see more governments "bring them into national security planning frameworks alongside energy facilities, telecommunications networks, water treatment plants and transportation hubs," said Hilco Global's Murphy.
AWS, Microsoft and Google declined to comment on security arrangements at data center sites in the region as a result of the conflict.
Many digital services have been restored over the past few days, but the Iranian drone strikes could sharpen focus on multi-region replication and backup options, Scott Tindall, partner in the infrastructure and energy team at law firm Hogan Lovells, told me.
While "sophisticated data center operators" already carry out detailed geopolitical risk assessments, he said, these will likely have to be "revisited in light of recent events."
The U.S. government has officially declared Anthropic a supply chain risk, CEO Dario Amodei confirmed on Thursday and said the company has "no choice" but to challenge the designation in court.
Tech companies with Middle East operations have scrambled to respond as fighting rippled across the region.
Xiaomi plans to launch a new smartphone processor chip every year, the company's President Lu Weibing told CNBC, underscoring its ambition to expand into more sophisticated areas of technology.
How Iran's Shahed drone, termed "the poor man's cruise missile" by some analysts, is shaping Tehran's retaliation.
The quote: OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said on Monday that the company "shouldn't have rushed" its recent deal with the U.S. Department of Defense, adding it "looked opportunistic and sloppy."
The big picture: On Friday, OpenAI announced it had struck a new deal with the Department of Defense.
The move came just hours after the dispute between Anthropic and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over safeguards for its Clause AI systems ended with President Donald Trump ordering U.S. government agencies to "immediately cease" using the company's tech.
Days later, Altman said the company would amend OpenAI's contract with the department to include new language regarding its principles on topics like surveillance.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
Every time Tim publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Enter your email
By clicking “Sign up”, you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
For Adam Janes, the odd thing about being a software engineer these days is that he rarely writes code anymore.
Instead, he spends more time drafting specifications in English that describe what a piece of software should do. AI kicks out the code. He reviews and refines it.
Janes isn't alone.
At Spotify, the company's top developers haven't drafted "a single line of code" since December, Gustav Söderström, the co-CEO, said on a February earnings call. Instead, engineers often supervise AI as it generates code.
"It is a big change. It is real, and it's happening fast," Söderström said.
Every time Tim publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Stay connected to Tim and get more of their work as it publishes.
By clicking "Sign up", you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
The speed at which AI is reshaping software development — measured in months, not years — is stirring a mix of excitement and anxiety. Last week, the tech company Block laid off more than 40% of its workforce, saying the cuts reflected AI-driven efficiencies.
For some software developers, there is an added reckoning: If the core act of coding — long a source of status and identity — becomes automated, what does it actually mean to be an engineer?
The threat isn't just displacement. It's a total recalibration of identity.
Janes, a fractional CTO based in Australia, takes pride in the skills he's built over a decade learning to write "elegant code" that's both simple and easy for others to read.
"You get this real sort of craftsman feel," he told Business Insider.
Now, Janes said, he spends more time creating robust specs for the AI tools building the software. That way, he can focus on solving problems.
"There's still a lot of engineering know-how, and this feeling of crafting, but it's kind of shifting to a totally different domain," he said.
For some engineers, it doesn't feel the same.
Annie Vella was 6 years old when her parents, tired of constantly handing her puzzles, bought her a computer whose manuals contained basic code. Curious, she said, she began typing in commands.
"I learned at such a young age the satisfaction of turning these words into something moving on a screen, as rudimentary as it was," Vella told Business Insider.
That early thrill of making something from nothing stayed with her. As a hands-on developer, she relished solving technical puzzles that few others could.
Now that AI systems are becoming more capable, Vella feels conflicted. On one hand, the tools help her move faster, solve more complex problems, and improve quality. Plus, as a technologist, she finds AI's capabilities incredible.
On the other hand, if she were still early in her career, she'd be "very upset about what's happening right now," Vella said.
Vella, who lives in New Zealand, recently completed a master's thesis examining AI's impact on her profession. There is, she said, a "sense of magic" in watching AI spin up large amounts of code at once. Still, Vella said, its output doesn't deliver the same feeling as that of staying up half the night wrestling with a stubborn bug and finally getting it to work.
"The satisfaction comes more from the friction that doesn't exist so much anymore," she said.
The struggle to overcome a challenge is often central to how people experience meaning in their work, said Mike Brooks, a psychologist in Austin.
"We evolved to struggle to survive," he told Business Insider. "We have to have challenges."
Brooks has written about the loss of purpose technologists can feel when AI takes over tasks that once required effort and skill. Working hard for something, he said, is part of what makes it worthwhile. Scarcity, not abundance, makes something precious.
"If you haven't eaten in five days and you get a banana, it will be the best meal you have ever had," Brooks said.
If AI can almost instantly generate what once required hours of concentration, the psychological rewards can diminish, he said. For engineers who built their identities around solving hard problems, that shift can feel destabilizing.
Jorge Melegati sees that tension in his research. A software developer and assistant professor at the University of Porto in Portugal, he studies how generative AI is reshaping developers' self-perception.
Many people begin coding because they want to build things, he said. As engineering roles evolve into overseeing AI agents, the developer's job can become "much simpler," yet also less satisfying, Melegati said.
Previous research, he said, suggests that would-be tech workers often view testing roles as less prestigious and less challenging than building software from scratch.
"It's considered a simpler job — not so challenging and not so rewarding," Melegati said.
That doesn't mean demand for the work will disappear. The US government projects that employment for "software developers, quality assurance analysts and testers" will increase 15% from 2024 through 2034 — far faster than the average for all jobs.
As AI's capabilities grow, many engineers are still negotiating what their roles will become, including Keenan Brock, a Massachusetts software developer who spent years honing his coding skills and mastering languages such as Java and Ruby on Rails.
"I focused on this one thing, and now it doesn't matter anymore," he told Business Insider.
So he's had to shift. Rather than "arm wrestling with a computer," Brock said, he enjoys being able to focus more on the problems businesses face and how software can help.
"Now I get to read between the lines," Brock said. "Somebody says, 'I want a faster horse,' and you're like, 'Oh, maybe you want a car.'"
Do you have a story to share about AI's effect on your career? Contact this reporter at tparadis@businessinsider.com.
Jump to
In this article
U.S. crude oil broke $90 per barrel Friday after President Donald Trump demanded unconditional surrender from Iran, raising fears of a prolonged war that will cause a cascading disruption to global oil supplies.
West Texas Intermediate futures were last up 11.27% to $90.14 per barrel, while global benchmark Brent was 8.09% higher at $92.32. U.S. crude has gained nearly 35% this week, while Brent has advanced nearly 28%.
"There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!," Trump said in a social media post.
The U.S.-Iran conflict has spread across the Middle East, disrupting energy production and bringing traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, a critical shipping route, to a near standstill.
Qatar's energy minister, Saad al-Kaabi, told The Financial Times Friday that crude prices could reach $150 per barrel in the coming weeks if oil tankers were unable to pass through the Strait. This could "bring down the economies of the world," Kaabi said.
"Everybody that has not called for force majeure we expect will do so in the next few days that this continues," Kaabi told the FT. "All exporters in the Gulf region will have to call force majeure. If they don't, they are at some point going to pay the liability for that legally, and that's their choice.".
Iraq has shut down 1.5 million barrels per day of production, two Iraqi officials told Reuters Tuesday. Kuwait has also started cutting production after running out of storage space, people familiar with the matter told The Wall Street Journal on Friday.
"The market is shifting from pricing pure geopolitical risk to grappling with tangible operational disruption," Natasha Kaneva, head of global commodities research at JPMorgan, told clients in a Friday note.
Production cuts could approach 6 million bpd the end of next week if the Strait is not open to traffic, Kaneva said. JPMorgan expects the United Arab Emirates to show supply constraints next week.
The average price for a gallon of regular gasoline jumped nearly 27 cents in the last week through Thursday to $3.25, according to data from U.S. travel organization AAA
The war between Iran and the U.S. entered its seventh day on Friday. In a press conference on Thursday, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the U.S. had "only just begun to fight."
"Iran is hoping that we cannot sustain this, which is a really bad miscalculation," he told reporters.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
Every time James publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Enter your email
By clicking “Sign up”, you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
David Ellison is tackling the mountain-sized challenge of transforming Paramount Skydance from a shrinking legacy media company into a Hollywood powerhouse.
The Paramount CEO is starting to unveil his long-awaited game plan: catch up to Netflix's tech, assemble a crew of top-tier executives, and rethink its news business. That goal — of creating a "next-generation" media company, in Ellison's words — is all before the planned mega-merger with Warner Bros. Discovery.
These steps show how the aspiring media mogul, who took charge of Paramount in August thanks to his tech billionaire father Larry Ellison, is remaking the 114-year-old company. Paramount's portfolio includes classic brands like CBS, Showtime, and MTV, and it has pledged to ramp up movie production to 30 films per year if its WBD deal goes through.
"I think he is, directionally, spot-on," said media analyst Rich Greenfield of Lightshed Partners. "They need a lot more content, and they need a much better underlying technology."
Ellison is out to prove he can beat Netflix at its own game — not just in a bidding war.
That's why Paramount is bolstering its streaming tech, which six staffers told Business Insider is inferior to industry leader Netflix's in both features and user experience. Ellison said in a memo he's focused on changing that by "prioritizing investments in advanced technology."
Paramount has said the combined subscriber base of its paid streamers and WBD's would be just under 200 million, compared with Netflix's 325 million.
"If you want to be successful, you try to copy what the successful people are doing," said Joe Bonner, a media analyst at Argus Research.
While Ellison didn't share more details, Business Insider has uncovered some yet-to-be announced features and others that are being workshopped.
Paramount executives are planning a move into short-form video on its flagship streamer to boost engagement by building habits.
"Nobody wakes up in the morning and goes, 'Oh, let me go see what's on Paramount+' the way they check out what's on YouTube or what's on Netflix," Greenfield said.
Paramount+ users could soon flip through TikTok-style vertical clips of "Top Gun: Maverick" or "SpongeBob SquarePants" on the streamer's mobile app.
Paramount+ product design head Dan Reich emailed product chief Dane Glasgow in mid-January, saying that his team was trying to "jump-start efforts to get a million clips" into its coming short-form platform "as quickly as possible."
Netflix previously stumbled in short-form video, but is trying again. Disney also plans to add AI-generated short clips from users to its namesake streamer after a deal with OpenAI.
Another first-quarter priority for Paramount in streaming is its sports multiview feature. Paramount debuted this feature last fall for UEFA soccer matches. A streaming tech staffer said a potential expansion could let people view multiple angles of a live event, such as a UFC match, simultaneously. While Netflix has live events, it doesn't have a multiview feature.
Paramount is also brainstorming streaming features like interactive shopping and user-generated content, which are the backbone of YouTube and TikTok, Business Insider reported. Netflix introduced shows with interactive storytelling as early as 2017, but has since scaled back. And while Netflix has added podcasts, it doesn't have user-generated content.
As Paramount prepares to jazz up its streamer, it's also working to become more like a tech company.
Paramount is merging the technical pieces of Paramount+ and Pluto TV, its free streamer. This process, known internally as "convergence," could help Paramount become more efficient. The company also plans to put Paramount+ and WBD's HBO Max into a single offering, assuming the acquisition closes.
As Paramount+ and Pluto TV come together, Ellison's company is joining key technical teams across the streamers, Business Insider reported. The reorganization will support "AI enablement and automated testing," according to a memo sent last week to staffers affected by the move.
Ellison has also put an emphasis on analytics by expanding the role of the data and insights team led by EVP Jason Kim.
This decision is central to "David's vision of trying to transform ourselves" into "the most tech-forward media company in this space," said Domenic DiMeglio, Paramount's head of streaming data, insights, and marketing.
When a new CEO takes over, leadership changes are rarely confined to the very top.
The same is true at Paramount. After taking the helm in early August, Ellison brought on former Netflix original content exec Cindy Holland to oversee the streaming business and, in October, picked polarizing editor Bari Weiss to lead CBS News.
Paramount also scored a personnel win by poaching Danielle Carney from Amazon's video and live sports sales team to lead its US ad sales group. It's also bringing on Chris Brady of Tribeca Enterprises as an EVP of its ads business. Both will report to revenue chief Jay Askinasi, who joined Paramount from Roku in November.
There have been high-profile departures at Paramount in recent months as well. Chris Simon, an EVP of agency partnerships who spent over three decades at Paramount, is stepping down, Business Insider reported last month, though he hasn't yet left the company.
Paramount's streaming product and tech, Vibol Hou, announced his departure via Slack weeks earlier, Business Insider reported.
CBS News has also seen a string of departures in the Weiss era, including several prominent producers and star correspondent Anderson Cooper.
While Ellison reorganizes and assembles a team to take Paramount to the pinnacle of Hollywood, the road ahead remains steep. Paramount will take on $79 billion of debt to finance the WBD purchase, putting pressure on the company to quickly perform for shareholders.
Ellison is also reshaping Paramount's news business, which may soon include WBD's CNN, and has faced criticism over how his political alliances could influence the company.
The 43-year-old CEO said on CNBC that he wants CBS News to be in the "truth business" and the "trust business" by serving the "70%" of people who are politically center-left or center-right.
Some analysts aren't sure Paramount can carve out that niche.
"Does that mean: make CNN less liberal? I don't know. That's a very fuzzy concept to me," Bonner said.
As Ellison puts his thumbprint on the news, some wonder who's influencing him. Ellison has built rapport with President Donald Trump, who called the Paramount CEO "great." He attended Trump's State of the Union speech with Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who then posted a photo with the Paramount CEO.
And Weiss, the anti-establishment leader Ellison appointed to shake up CBS News, has faced staff questions about how her political views could impact the news operation. Weiss said she wasn't "a mouthpiece for anybody" when defending her choice to delay a "60 Minutes" story critical of the Trump administration.
Another potential influence is Middle Eastern wealth funds, which Paramount won't confirm or deny are helping back its bid for WBD. Critics worry that even if Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Abu Dhabi don't have direct governance rights at Paramount, they could still try to informally sway Paramount management if they are investors.
"We do expect to syndicate with strategic domestic and foreign investors," Gerry Cardinale, a leading Paramount investor of RedBird Capital, said on a podcast while sidestepping the question of potential Middle Eastern backers. "But at the end of the day, that alchemy shouldn't matter, because it'll be done in the right way."
Have a tip or Paramount-related story idea? Contact this reporter via email at jfaris@businessinsider.com or Signal at @jamesfaris.01. Use a personal email address and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.
Jump to
China's opposition to the U.S. and Israeli war on Iran is stoking tensions between Beijing and Washington just weeks before a high-stakes meeting between Presidents Donald Trump and Xi Jinping.
The Middle East offensive, which has killed China-friendly Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and a slew of other Iranian officials, shows the U.S. doubling down hard on its willingness to eschew diplomacy and launch high-risk military operations in pursuit of its global goals. The war began less than two months after the U.S. attacked Venezuela to capture the country's president, Nicolas Maduro, and his wife, who are now both in custody in New York City.
The actions also show that, even as a tumultuous trade war between the U.S. and China has settled into an uneasy detente, the Trump administration is willing to rock the boat in countries where Beijing exerts significant influence.
The attacks aren't likely to halt or compromise diplomacy between the two superpowers. But they will set the "mood music" for Trump's upcoming summit with Xi in China, said Tim Keeler, partner and co-head of international trade at Mayer Brown.
The display of speed and force in the Maduro raid was "nothing short of stunning" and served as a reminder to China of U.S. military capabilities, Keeler said in a phone interview.
If the Iran incursion shapes up similarly to Venezuela, "then it could end up being a significant change in the nature of the background music for the meeting," he said.
That could affect both the talks themselves and any agreements that come out of them, experts say. And while some think the U.S. strikes may give Trump a slight boost with Xi, they also note the advantage could flip to China depending how the days-old war evolves.
Trump is expected to travel to China from March 31 to April 2. Beforehand, top U.S. and Chinese trade officials, including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng, are expected to meet in Paris to discuss tariffs and possible deals on U.S. soybeans and Boeing aircraft, Bloomberg reported this week.
The U.S. and Israel started bombarding Iran with air strikes on Saturday, with Trump initially identifying regime change in Tehran as a key goal.
In the days since, the administration's explanations for both the timing and broader purpose of the strikes have morphed. Officials eventually coalesced around a four-pronged justification for the war: to destroy Iran's missile program, cripple its navy, prevent it from obtaining nuclear weapons and ensure it can no longer support fighters beyond its borders.
Markets have churned in response to the fighting, which has massively disrupted shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial energy corridor.
China, the world's largest customer for Iranian oil exports, has come out against the war and called for an immediate ceasefire.
"The Strait of Hormuz and its adjacent waters are an important international trade route for goods and energy. To keep the region secure and stable serves the common interests of the international community," Liu Pengyu, a spokesman for the China's embassy in Washington, told CNBC in a statement Thursday.
"China urges relevant parties to immediately stop military operations, avoid further escalation of the tense situation and prevent regional turmoil from causing greater damage to global economic growth," Liu said.
International oil prices, which were down from their recent highs, have surged back up due to supply disruptions, creating visible ripples in the global economy including a sudden jump in U.S. gas prices.
But China and other Asian economies, which receive most of the crude shipped through the Strait of Hormuz, could face the most exposure.
Bessent suggested Wednesday on CNBC that the developments in Venezuela and Iran are poised to hurt Beijing more.
"China is very vulnerable on the energy side," he told "Squawk Box," noting that the Asian economy had been "paying a big discount."
"That's obviously on hold right now, and then we'll go from there," Bessent said.
Some analysts say the war could bolster Trump's position — for now, at least — as China's interest in maintaining its dialogue with the U.S. outweighs its growing concerns about U.S. aggression.
"In the immediate term, the optics arguably favour Trump," Jack Lee, an analyst at China Macro Group, told CNBC in an email.
"A U.S. administration willing to strike, and to absorb blowback, can look like it is arriving 'from a position of strength,' which may inject a degree of caution into Beijing," he said.
Lee noted that China's tone when responding to the U.S. strikes has been "unusually" soft, especially when compared to its more full-throated condemnation of the Maduro raid.
Yue Su, principal economist at the Economist Intelligence Unit, agreed that despite growing risks and uncertainties, the war likely won't derail the Trump-Xi meeting.
Instead, it may become a part of the negotiations, she said: "This is far more important to China compared to the Venezuela case. China is currently expanding its investments in the Middle East, so it needs to consider the potential spillover effects."
David Meale, China practice head at political risk consultancy Eurasia Group, told CNBC the U.S. hasn't necessarily gained leverage with Iran, because there's no "obvious outcome with China that it can achieve based on these other developments."
The war may nevertheless shape China's response, Meale added, by increasing Beijing's incentive to "engage in ways that will set expectations for maintaining stability in bilateral ties."
Experts have stressed that the Iran war is still in its infancy, and that dynamics could shift wildly between now and the date of Trump's overseas trip.
"Three weeks is a long time," Keeler said.
— CNBC's Eamon Javers contributed to this report.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
Every time Allie publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Enter your email
By clicking “Sign up”, you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
Jordynn Ison dreams about Bangkok's sunshine, street food, and affordable dental work.
The 27-year-old calls Ohio home and has been solo traveling for the past few years. She almost always schedules doctors' visits during her overseas vacations to destinations like Bali, Vietnam, Japan, South Korea, Turkey, and more. It's cheaper that way.
"It's just so convenient and so easy and so affordable," she said, adding that her recent dental crown procedure in Thailand cost about $500, roughly half of the average US price. "It surprises me that more people don't do it."
The medical tourism industry is booming. To escape high hospital prices and insurance headaches, Americans are folding check-ups into their vacation itineraries. Some countries, like Turkey and Mexico, are even marketing themselves directly to US patients. People travel for a range of services, including cosmetic surgeries, reproductive procedures like IVF, and cancer care.
The US doesn't comprehensively track this phenomenon, but the Centers for Disease Control estimates that millions of Americans seek healthcare abroad every year. And the market is growing: International health insurance is expected to grow from nearly $32 billion in 2025 to $40 billion in 2030, with North Americans accounting for the largest share. There's a flood of posts tagged #medicaltourism on both TikTok and Instagram, some with hundreds of thousands of views. Business Insider has heard from dozens of people who have bundled scans with sightseeing — and interest spans from Gen Zers to baby boomers.
Every time Allie publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Stay connected to Allie and get more of their work as it publishes.
By clicking "Sign up", you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
"In Asia, it's way cheaper, the quality of care is always good, and there are so many options to choose from," Ison said. "Whereas when you book things in the US, not only do you pay more money for it — even when you have insurance — but also it can take months to get in."
Do you have a healthcare story to share? Reach out to this reporter at allisonkelly@businessinsider.com
Charlene Wiyarand, 31, had no doubts about booking her rhinoplasty appointment abroad. She has long split her life between the US and Asia: She was born in Boston, grew up in Thailand, and has been a California resident for the past few years.
When it came time to update her nose job recently, she and her fiancé traveled to South Korea, where Wiyarand said she could get the procedure for $13,000 out of pocket, instead of the roughly $30,000 going price in Beverly Hills. She would rather use that extra money for household expenses, she said.
"When we're in Asia, we know everything's going to be cheaper anyway," Wiyarand said. "I feel very comfortable going to hospital and just paying everything up front."
She works for a pharmaceutical company in California and has an employer-sponsored health insurance plan. But she still feels it's cheaper to book out-of-pocket care while traveling than to pay co-pays and fees in the US. Besides a rhinoplasty, Wiyarand said she has gotten preventive scans and skin treatments in places like Thailand.
As for Ison, she left her full-time nursing job a year and a half ago to split time between temporary nursing positions in Ohio and travel influencing. She no longer qualifies for an employer-sponsored insurance plan at home, so she enrolled in an international plan — and now sees the doctor almost exclusively on trips.
She pays about $50 a month for an international insurance plan that covers general care in 180 countries. That plan helps offset the costs of bigger scans or procedures, she said, but sometimes she can find care so cheap she doesn't submit it to insurance at all. Bloodwork and dental cleanings in Southeast Asia typically cost her about $30 total.
For now, both Wiyarand and Ison plan to continue living in the US and getting some primary care appointments near home. But foreign hospitals seem like an affordable option for larger procedures and preventive scans. Wiyarand hopes to travel abroad for a colonoscopy soon.
"I did have insurance in the US, but it was harder for me to get appointments," Ison said, adding, "Not only that, but with insurance, you have to meet a certain minimum amount before insurance really starts kicking in for medical things."
Some Americans are so enticed by low healthcare costs that they're considering permanent relocation. Cara West, 34, is beginning to settle down in Greece with her husband and toddler, and she doubts they'll ever move back to Texas. Cheaper medicine and cost of living are driving the decision.
West and her husband began living overseas shortly after their daughter was born in 2022. They were still paying off expensive labor and delivery bills and decided to try living in Portugal for a few months. Since then, the couple has traveled around Europe, Asia, and the Mediterranean. Last year, they even flew to Turkey for primary care appointments.
"There's this fear as an American because you know that medicine is so expensive and it's confusing," said West, who pays $657 a month for international health insurance for her family, which she said is less than her previous US employer plan. "I think that's been the biggest eye opener, this feeling of relief."
When Business Insider spoke to retirees Akaisha and Billy Kaderli last spring, they shared their experience pursuing breast cancer treatment in Mexico, Vietnam, and Thailand. The couple paid $18,807 out of pocket for Akaisha's diagnosis and surgery instead of going through Medicare Advantage in the US. It wasn't cheap, but it allowed them to largely preserve their retirement nest egg. They don't plan to move back to the States.
"We've had a great life," said Akaisha, who is in her early 70s. "I'm not looking to die, but I wasn't going to spend my money on hospitals and drugs."
Healthcare abroad isn't always subject to the same accreditation standards or staff training as American hospitals, and it carries risks, just like any medical procedure. The people Business Insider interviewed said they did careful research — reading reviews and taking informational phone calls with clinics — before undergoing medical care in another country. Many of them were avid travelers already, meaning that buying plane tickets or hotel stays to see a doctor wasn't an additional cost barrier.
But their experiences underscore a larger truth millions of Americans can relate to: Skyrocketing healthcare costs are becoming unsustainable for household budgets. Medical tourism is offering some travelers more bang for their buck.
"I wish people would realize how much easier it really is," Ison said. "I think some people get scared because they have it in their heads that if they don't speak the language and they're in another country, that it can't be good care. Honestly, my experience is the exact opposite."
Jump to
In this article
Danish shipping giant Maersk on Friday temporarily suspended two services linking the Middle East to Asia and Europe as the Iran war continues to disrupt global supply chains.
The company, widely regarded as a barometer of global trade, said the decision to halt the FM1 service, connecting the Far East to the Middle East, and the ME11 Service, linking the Middle East to Europe, was a precautionary measure to ensure the safety of its personnel and vessels.
It comes as the U.S. and Israeli-led war on Iran enters its seventh day, with the expanding conflict resulting in the effective halt of shipping traffic through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz.
The waterway is a key, narrow maritime corridor that connects the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. Roughly 20% of global oil and gas typically passes through it.
Container shipping giants, however, have suspended operations through the Strait of Hormuz since the U.S. and Israel launched attacks on Iran on Feb. 28 and rerouted vessels around the southern tip of Africa.
The crisis has left 147 container ships sheltering in the Persian Gulf, according to freight analytics firm Xeneta, prompting delays, port congestion, and freight rate increases that are rippling across global markets.
Alongside the changes to the FM1 service and the ME11 service, Maersk said its shuttle services in the Persian Gulf region were suspended until further notice.
The ME1 service connecting the Middle East to northern Europe will temporarily drop the call in Jebel Ali, a major port city in the United Arab Emirates, Maersk said, and continue to call India and Oman.
Shares of Maersk were last seen 0.6% lower.
Got a confidential news tip? We want to hear from you.
Sign up for free newsletters and get more CNBC delivered to your inbox
Get this delivered to your inbox, and more info about our products and services.
© 2026 Versant Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. A Versant Media Company.
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes.
Global Business and Financial News, Stock Quotes, and Market Data
and Analysis.
Data also provided by
Every time Lee Chong Ming publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Enter your email
By clicking “Sign up”, you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
For years, China's top graduates chased jobs in finance and tech. Now, many are heading into manufacturing and energy instead.
Employment data from Tsinghua University — one of China's top tertiary institutions — published on its website on Tuesday shows the number of graduates entering the manufacturing and energy sectors rose 19.1% year over year for the class of 2025.
Top employers for this year's Tsinghua graduates include Huawei, BYD, State Grid Corporation of China, and China National Nuclear Corporation, the university said.
Huawei is a global telecom equipment giant, while BYD is one of the world's biggest electric-vehicle makers. State Grid runs China's power grid, and China National Nuclear Corporation leads its nuclear industry.
The share of Tsinghua graduates entering the manufacturing and energy sectors has grown for six consecutive years, according to the university. Tsinghua said last year that the number of Class of 2024 graduates joining those sectors rose 11% year on year.
Every time Lee Chong Ming publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Stay connected to Lee Chong Ming and get more of their work as it publishes.
By clicking "Sign up", you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
Often compared with MIT or Stanford, Tsinghua is widely viewed as China's top engineering university and a key pipeline for talent entering the country's tech and industrial giants.
The trend is not limited to China's most elite university. At Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 2025 graduate employment statistics published in January showed about 2,000 graduates entering the information-technology sector and about 1,500 moving into manufacturing, compared with just around 300 entering finance and 240 joining construction.
The share of Chinese graduates entering manufacturing rose from 17.9% in 2020 to 22.5% in 2024, according to South China Morning Post, citing a report by MyCOS Institute, a consultancy focused on China's education.
Experts told Business Insider that several factors are driving more graduates toward manufacturing and energy jobs.
China's industrial sectors, especially semiconductors, electric vehicles, batteries, and renewable energy, have become "highly technology-intensive and now demand top engineering talent," said Fu Fangjian, associate professor of finance at Singapore Management University.
Many young graduates now see them as "opportunities to work on cutting-edge technologies rather than traditional factory work," he said, adding that these jobs can offer "very competitive" salaries.
Experts say the nature of manufacturing jobs has evolved as China upgrades its industrial base.
Sectors such as electric vehicles, power equipment, and nuclear energy now require expertise in engineering, data science, and systems integration, said Zhao Litao, a senior research fellow with the East Asian Institute at the National University of Singapore.
"'Hardware' and advanced manufacturing are no longer seen as low-skill industries but as high-tech innovation sectors involving robotics, semiconductors, advanced materials, and industrial AI," Fu said.
As a result, advanced manufacturing is increasingly viewed as a frontier technology sector rather than a blue-collar industry, said Zhao, who researches China's social policy.
Highly technical engineering or research roles in this sector "carry considerable prestige among engineering students," he added.
For years, many of China's top graduates gravitated toward internet platforms and finance, drawn by rapid growth and high pay.
But hiring in the platform economy has slowed, while tighter regulation has added more uncertainty, said Fu.
"At the same time, investment attention has shifted toward HALO sectors —hardware, industrial technology, and energy— redirecting both capital and talent," he added.
China's job market has long been challenging for young graduates entering the workforce.
In December, the unemployment rate for people aged 16 to 24 — excluding students — stood at 16.5%, according to data released by the National Bureau of Statistics in January. By comparison, unemployment was 6.9% for those aged 25 to 29 and 3.9% for workers aged 30 to 59.
The Chinese tech sector has been trimming headcount in recent years as companies focus on cutting costs and improving efficiency.
Alibaba's workforce has shrunk by more than half, from about 250,000 full-time employees in March 2022 to about 124,000 in March 2025, according to a report by Chinese financial news outlet Caixin.
Baidu's workforce stood at 35,900 at the end of 2024, down 21.1% from its peak in 2021, the report in August added.
Meanwhile, demand in manufacturing remains strong. A government manufacturing talent development plan projected that nearly 30 million skilled manufacturing jobs could go unfilled by 2025.
"China is the world's largest producer of electric vehicles, batteries, and solar equipment, and these sectors require a large technical workforce," said Zhao.
Government policy has also helped reshape the job landscape, experts said.
Over the past decade, China has prioritised strategic sectors such as electric vehicles, renewable energy, power equipment, and advanced materials through industrial policies, research programmes, and large-scale investment, said Zhao.
"These sectors have therefore become major employers of engineering graduates," he added.
Universities, research institutes, and state-supported firms are aligned with these national priorities, which encourages more talented graduates to enter these fields, Fu said.
Jump to
Every time Katherine publishes a story, you'll get an alert straight to your inbox!
Enter your email
By clicking “Sign up”, you agree to receive emails from Business Insider. In addition, you accept Insider's
Terms of Service and
Privacy Policy.
Amazon experienced an outage on Thursday that lasted into the evening, and tens of thousands of shoppers said they had trouble accessing Amazon's services.
According to outage tracker Downdetector, reports of issues surged Thursday afternoon, reaching about 20,000 by 3:49 p.m. ET on March 5. Complaints first spiked around 2:30 p.m., when roughly 18,000 users reported problems. The number briefly dipped to around 16,000 before climbing again.
Users on Downdetector said the problems ranged from checkout and payment failures to incorrect or fluctuating prices appearing on product listings.
"We're sorry that some customers may be experiencing issues while shopping," Amazon said in an earlier statement to Business Insider. "We appreciate customers' patience as we work to resolve the issue."
The outage does not appear to be related to Amazon Web Services. When AWS experienced an outage in October 2025, it knocked out a slew of other apps that rely on the cloud service, including Wordle, Slack, Snapchat, and Reddit.
That outage was attributed to a DNS error in Amazon's Virginia data center.
As of 8 p.m. ET, Amazon's issue appears to be resolved, and Downdetector is no longer receiving a high number of outage reports.
"We have resolved the issue, which was related to a software code deployment, and website and app are now running smoothly," said Amazon in its latest statement to Business Insider.
Jump to
e-Edition
Get the latest news delivered daily!
Get the latest news delivered daily!
e-Edition
Trending:
Despite never purchasing a single Bitcoin or cryptocurrency directly, California's two largest public pension funds hold hundreds of millions of dollars in volatile crypto-related assets. The California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) and the California State Teachers Retirement System (CalSTRS) disclosed holdings in crypto-linked public companies, Coinbase and Strategy. At Bitcoin's market peak last year, those investments were worth over $500 million in total, but they are currently worth less than $300 million.
Compared with nearly $900 billion in total assets managed by CalPERS and CalSTRS, the share of crypto-linked equities in their investment portfolios is extremely small, about 0.03%. However, what is most concerning is not the size of the investment or the current losses, but how crypto risk has become part of the portfolios of public pension plans backed by taxpayer dollars.
Public pension systems do not need new laws or explicit authorization to invest in crypto. They routinely acquire it through conventional public equity investments. Coinbase, for example, is a publicly traded cryptocurrency exchange that generates revenue from trading, custody, and other services. While it is a legitimate operating company with assets and cash flow, its valuation and risk profile remain tightly linked to crypto market performance.
The company formerly known as MicroStrategy, now Strategy, goes even further. Though classified as a software firm, Strategy has effectively transformed itself into a Bitcoin holding vehicle, financing large Bitcoin purchases through debt and equity issuance. As a result, its stock functions as a highly leveraged proxy for Bitcoin exposure, as evidenced by CalPERS' investment. Bitcoin was trading at over $126,000 last October but was under $67,000 at the start of March. Similarly, Strategy was trading at over $450 last year as Bitcoin soared but went below $130 last week.
Pension plans also have exposure to crypto through venture capital and private equity funds that are explicitly mandated to invest in digital-asset companies. However, these holdings are rarely labeled as crypto-related in public disclosures. Instead, they are often reported simply as public or private equities, leaving taxpayers and other stakeholders with an incomplete understanding of volatility and risks.
California's public pension systems are not outliers in their crypto investments. Other pension funds across the country have also accumulated billions in crypto exposure, whether deliberately or incidentally, through index funds, active equity strategies, and crypto-linked exchange-traded products.
This matters because public pensions are not like typical investors. Pension benefits promised to public workers in California are guaranteed. When risky investments underperform, taxpayers are required to pay for unfunded pension liabilities.
At the end of the 2024 fiscal year, CalPERS and CalSTRS together reported about $205 billion in unfunded liabilities. When including California's numerous local public pension systems, the total pension debt Californians are responsible for reaches nearly $270 billion. This public pension debt must be offset by higher employee contributions, which governments rarely ask for, by more tax increases on already overtaxed Californians, or by public service cuts.
CalPERS is the largest public pension system in the country. Given its massive size, its current hundred-million-dollar crypto exposure is negligible, but it is likely to grow in the coming years if crypto succeeds in its intended integration with traditional capital markets. Investing in digital assets, whether directly or through firms that service the crypto ecosystem, may be defensible if it is deliberate, transparent, and explicitly categorized.
For CalPERS, CalSTRS, and other public pension funds, crypto-related risk should be disclosed separately in asset-allocation reports, not buried within broad equity buckets that hide the true risks.
If California's pension systems invest in cryptocurrencies and other digital assets, allocations should be small, fully disclosed, subject to strict custody and stress testing, and have clear exit strategies to protect taxpayers.
Mariana Trujillo is managing director of government finance at Reason Foundation and co-author of the study, “U.S. public pension and trust fund investment in digital assets.”
Copyright 2026 Orange County Register. All rights reserved. The use of any content on this website for the purpose of training artificial intelligence systems, algorithms, machine learning models, text and data mining, or similar use is strictly prohibited without explicit written consent.
Bitcoin's move to a one-month high of $74,000 this week triggered a wave of profit-taking from short-term traders, according to data from CryptoQuant.
The largest cryptocurrency is trading around $69,000 after losing momentum from Wednesday's break above $70,000.
CryptoQuant analyst Darkfost explains that short-term holders transferred more than 27,000 BTC ($1.8 billion) to exchanges in profit over the past 24 hours — one of the largest spikes in recent months.
The only short-term investors currently in profit are those who accumulated bitcoin between one week and one month ago, with a realized price of roughly $68,000, suggesting some recent buyers are choosing to lock in gains rather than extend their positions.
Short-term holders are typically the most reactive group in the market, and their selling reflects lingering caution in light of the ongoing war in Iran.
CoinDesk analysis on Wednesday identified a potential bull trap as price action mirrored that in January when price broke out to $98,000 before taking a leg lower.
And that leg lower occurred on Friday, accelerated by comments from U.S. president Donald Trump who demanded that Iran unconditionally surrenders - a move that also sent the price of oil soaring.
Despite the profit-taking, broader factors are helping support bitcoin's rally according to Adrian Fritz, chief investment strategist at 21Shares.
Fritz said traders are increasingly betting that the Clarity Act, a U.S. digital asset market structure bill, could pass by year-end. Prediction markets currently price the probability at around 70%, though Fritz noted these markets are relatively illiquid.
He also pointed to rising geopolitical tensions and strong institutional demand as key drivers.
Some investors are increasingly viewing bitcoin as a “gold beta” trade, rotating into the asset after gold's recent rally. Meanwhile, spot bitcoin ETFs have shown resilience, with holdings down only about 5% during the recent pullback and over $700 million in net inflows this week.
While political developments may have helped spark the move, Fritz said the rally is being sustained by geopolitical hedging and growing institutional conviction in the asset.
More For You
CoinDesk Research looks into how Pudgy Penguins disrupts traditional toys market via a phygital model. With 2M+ units sold, they scale via global partnerships and events.
What to know:
More For You
BlackRock private credit fund is latest to crack, hitting crypto prices and DeFi markets
Stress in the $3.5 trillion private credit market could ripple into digital assets through both macro contagion and tokenized credit markets, experts warn.
What to know:
Disclosure & Polices: CoinDesk is an award-winning media outlet that covers the cryptocurrency industry. Its journalists abide by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk has adopted a set of principles aimed at ensuring the integrity, editorial independence and freedom from bias of its publications. CoinDesk is part of Bullish (NYSE:BLSH), an institutionally focused global digital asset platform that provides market infrastructure and information services. Bullish owns and invests in digital asset businesses and digital assets and CoinDesk employees, including journalists, may receive Bullish equity-based compensation.
Risk markets are taking new legs lower on Friday morning after U.S. President Donald Trump seemingly quashed any chance of some sort of negotiated settlement with Iran.
"There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER," said the president in a Truth Social post.
The news sent WTI crude oil to a multi-year high near $90 per barrel, and in turn sent Nasdaq futures lower by 1.8%. That hit crypto prices as well, pushing bitcoin to new session lows, down 5% at $68,800.
U.S. payrolls unexpectedly declined by 92,000 jobs in February, highlighting a cooling U.S. labor market just as rising oil prices and geopolitical tensions complicate the Federal Reserve's outlook. The unemployment rate also ticked higher to 4.4% from 4.3% the previous month.
The weak report reinforces a broader slowdown in hiring that has been building over the past year.
“Let me put this another way: The U.S. economy has lost jobs since April 2025,” economist Heather Long wrote on X. “Total job gains from May 2025 to February 2026 are now -19,000. Companies are not hiring in the face of all of these headwinds and uncertainty.”
Normally, data like this would have the Federal Reserve busily cutting rates, but the central bank continues to face inflation that remains above its 2% target, and the sharp rise in oil threatens to worsen the price outlook.
For the moment, interest rate traders continue to bet on little chance for an imminent rate cut. The odds of a March cut are just 4% and an April cut only 17%.
More For You
CoinDesk Research looks into how Pudgy Penguins disrupts traditional toys market via a phygital model. With 2M+ units sold, they scale via global partnerships and events.
What to know:
More For You
BlackRock private credit fund is latest to crack, hitting crypto prices and DeFi markets
Stress in the $3.5 trillion private credit market could ripple into digital assets through both macro contagion and tokenized credit markets, experts warn.
What to know:
Disclosure & Polices: CoinDesk is an award-winning media outlet that covers the cryptocurrency industry. Its journalists abide by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk has adopted a set of principles aimed at ensuring the integrity, editorial independence and freedom from bias of its publications. CoinDesk is part of Bullish (NYSE:BLSH), an institutionally focused global digital asset platform that provides market infrastructure and information services. Bullish owns and invests in digital asset businesses and digital assets and CoinDesk employees, including journalists, may receive Bullish equity-based compensation.
Oops, something went wrong
The market sentiment is bearish despite Bitcoin trading near $70,000. While the flagship cryptocurrency commands headlines with its resilience, a massive portion of the market is quietly bleeding out, especially the altcoins sector.
According to new data, nearly 40% of altcoins are currently trading near their all-time lows. More alarmingly, many have sunk below the prices seen during the catastrophic collapse of the FTX exchange in November 2022, including the FTX bottom.
Netizens don't seem too excited by altcoins either. One X user wrote, “My altcoin portfolio is basically a meme now, but my diamond hands aren't going anywhere!”
Meanwhile, another user wrote, “Actually, I am more bullish on altcoins than Bitcoin.”
It feels like a ghost town in the altcoin market right now. But does this signal the death of Altcoin Season, or is it the ultimate contrarian buy signal?
DISCOVER: Top Crypto Presales to Watch Now
“Altcoins are suffering from a ‘liquidity drain,' where even minor shifts in sentiment trigger outsized sell-offs,” said Jimmy Xue, co-founder of liquidity platform Axis, in a media interview.
While Bitcoin has recovered significantly from the 2022 lows, the broader market has not followed suit.
Approximately 38% of altcoins are trading at or below their levels from the post-FTX crash. This indicates that for many assets, the entire bull run of 2024-2025 essentially didn't happen. In fact, daily trading volume has plummeted. Major names are struggling. Polygon (POL) is trading just cents off its all-time low. Cardano (ADA) is hovering dangerously close to its cycle bottom, though it remains slightly above the absolute floor.
This divergence explains the frustration many retail investors feel. Social media interest in altcoins has fallen in tandem with prices, creating a feedback loop of apathy and selling pressure.
DISCOVER: Next Possible 1000x Crypto in 2026
During the Market Cycle lows of 2019 and late 2023, altcoins were declared “dead” right before they pulled 10x to 50x returns. The fact that Google search volumes for “altcoins” have dropped to a yearly low of 4 out of 100 suggests we are deep in the capitulation phase (when investors give up and sell out of despair).
Even strong projects take hits during these phases. We recently saw Solana down 67% in a crash that seemed fatal at the moment, only for it to remain a top contender for network activity. The market ruthlessly tests your conviction before rewarding you.
In previous cycles, money flowed from Bitcoin to Ethereum, and then down to smaller caps. That pipeline is currently clogged. The problem is liquidity.
Right now, Bitcoin Dominance is suffocating alts. Institutional money is flowing into Bitcoin via ETFs, but it isn't rotating out. Instead, institutional demand and ETF flows have become a walled garden, keeping capital locked in the safest asset.
DISCOVER: 5 High-Risk High-Reward Cryptos
38% of altcoins are trading below the price levels seen during the FTX collapse of 2022, signaling a severe hidden bear market.
Extreme apathy and low search volume usually signal late-stage capitulation, historically a precursor to a market reversal.
Liquidity remains trapped in Bitcoin due to high dominance; altcoins likely won't recover until BTC consolidates or breaks ATH.
Follow 99Bitcoins on X for the Latest Market Updates and Subscribe on YouTube for Daily Expert Market Analysis.
Read original story Crypto Altcoin Ghost Town: 38% of Altcoins Trading Below FTX-Crash Lows by Akriti Seth at 99bitcoins.com
Table of Contents
PEI Licensing, the parent entity behind Original Penguin, initiated legal proceedings against the Pudgy Penguins NFT project in Florida's Southern District Court. The complaint accuses the blockchain-based brand of unauthorized utilization of penguin imagery and related intellectual property. According to court documents, the cryptocurrency venture allegedly violated Original Penguin's established trademark protections.
The licensing firm contends that Pudgy Penguins' branding elements and visual designs generate consumer confusion in the marketplace. PEI specifically pointed to similarities across clothing lines and hat products. The legal action aims to block continued commercial exploitation of contested marks.
Additionally, PEI demands financial restitution based on revenue generated from the NFT brand's merchandise sales. The company requests court-ordered destruction of all inventory featuring disputed designs. PEI also petitions for rejection of multiple trademark applications Pudgy Penguins filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
The complaint asserts that the NFT venture's business practices breach unfair competition statutes. PEI maintains the blockchain company's operations undermine decades of established brand equity and customer trust. Court filings reference specific instances where penguin-themed garments appear substantially similar.
According to PEI, Pudgy Penguins sought trademark protection for terminology including “Pengu Nation.” These registration attempts encompass product categories already protected under Original Penguin's existing marks. The licensing firm contends such filings would erode market clarity and brand identity.
Court records indicate the NFT brand persisted with disputed branding despite receiving prior legal notifications. PEI dispatched a formal cease-and-desist communication in October 2023. The company subsequently lodged formal opposition proceedings with patent authorities throughout 2024.
Representatives from Pudgy Penguins expressed astonishment at the lawsuit's filing. The organization stated that confidential negotiations had been underway to address concerns amicably. The NFT brand maintains its visual identity bears clear distinctions from Original Penguin's established marks.
The blockchain venture emphasized it has successfully obtained numerous trademark approvals from USPTO authorities. Pudgy Penguins asserts its customer base and market positioning differ fundamentally from Original Penguin's traditional retail segment. Company officials expressed confidence that judicial review will vindicate their position.
The legal filing demands immediate cessation of all Pudgy Penguins activities involving penguin-inspired imagery. PEI requests market withdrawal of any merchandise potentially creating brand confusion. The licensing company maintains active surveillance of the NFT brand's retail operations and digital commerce platforms.
Pudgy Penguins debuted its Ethereum-based NFT series in 2021, rapidly ascending to prominence within cryptocurrency communities. The project expanded into Solana blockchain infrastructure with its PENGU token and penetrated mainstream retail through physical toy distributions. Industry reports suggest the collection achieved sales exceeding $10 million during its inaugural twelve months.
This legal confrontation illustrates escalating tensions between conventional intellectual property holders and blockchain-native enterprises. PEI Licensing emphasizes trademark rights extending to 1956 for its penguin iconography. The judicial determination may establish important precedents governing intellectual property enforcement against cryptocurrency-related ventures.
Editor-in-Chief of Blockonomi and founder of Kooc Media, A UK-Based Online Media Company. Believer in Open-Source Software, Blockchain Technology & a Free and Fair Internet for all.
His writing has been quoted by Nasdaq, Dow Jones, Investopedia, The New Yorker, Forbes, Techcrunch & More. Contact Oliver@blockonomi.com
Comments are closed.
Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.
ZunaBet New Crypto Casino: 250% Bonus & 75 Free Casino Spins, Claim!
The U.S. job market weakened appreciably in February, possibly putting back in play the chance of Federal Reserve rate cuts in the first half of 2026.
The country lost 92,000 jobs last month, according to Friday's report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Economists had forecast an addition of 59,000 new jobs, compared with January's gain of 126,000.
The unemployment rate rose to 4.4% versus economist expectations of 4.3%, and January's reading of 4.3%.
Under pressure overnight ahead of the report and trading down to $70,000 as oil soared higher and equity markets dipped, bitcoin BTC$68,373.92 remained right around that mark in the minutes following the data.
U.S. stock index futures continue lower, with the Nasdaq down 1% and S&P 500 off 0.8%. The 10-year Treasury yield has fallen four basis points to 4.11%. Precious metals reversed an early decline, with gold now higher by 1% and silver by 2%. WTI crude oil is up 6.2% to $86 per barrel.
Ahead of this morning's report, markets were pricing in a 95% probability that the Federal Reserve would hold rates steady at the March 18 meeting and an 85% chance of no rate cut in April.
Meanwhile, rising oil prices linked to tensions in the Middle East could add upward pressure to inflation expectations. If sustained, higher energy prices may feed into broader inflation, particularly through energy and food costs. Combined with signs that the U.S. economy may be re-accelerating, this could prompt markets to reassess the path of monetary policy.
More For You
CoinDesk Research looks into how Pudgy Penguins disrupts traditional toys market via a phygital model. With 2M+ units sold, they scale via global partnerships and events.
What to know:
More For You
BlackRock private credit fund is latest to crack, hitting crypto prices and DeFi markets
Stress in the $3.5 trillion private credit market could ripple into digital assets through both macro contagion and tokenized credit markets, experts warn.
What to know:
Disclosure & Polices: CoinDesk is an award-winning media outlet that covers the cryptocurrency industry. Its journalists abide by a strict set of editorial policies. CoinDesk has adopted a set of principles aimed at ensuring the integrity, editorial independence and freedom from bias of its publications. CoinDesk is part of Bullish (NYSE:BLSH), an institutionally focused global digital asset platform that provides market infrastructure and information services. Bullish owns and invests in digital asset businesses and digital assets and CoinDesk employees, including journalists, may receive Bullish equity-based compensation.
On February 27, 2026, the UK Information Commissioner's Office (“ICO”) announced a public consultation on proposed updates to its guidance concerning the Research, Archiving and Statistics Provisions (the “Guidance”). The updates reflect the changes introduced by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (the “DUAA”). In particular, the Guidance revises the ICO's criteria for scientific research and introduces the new “disproportionate effort” exemption related to informing data subjects about the reuse of previously collected data for research, as set out under Section 77 of the DUAA.
Scientific Research
The DUAA introduces a statutory definition of what constitutes “scientific research” under the UK General Data Protection Regulation. Namely, “scientific research” is defined as “any research that can reasonably be described as scientific, whether publicly or privately funded and whether carried out as a commercial or non-commercial activity.” In response to the updates introduced by the DUAA, the UK ICO has revised its criteria for scientific research, focussing on four elements: (i) scientific objective, (ii) scientific method, (iii) uncertainty and (iv) transferability. Each criterion is supported by indicative evidence (such as involvement of skilled professionals or use of recognized research methods) and exclusionary evidence (such as research causing harm or merely replicating existing technology). According to an example given by the ICO, a research project aiming to reduce bias in facial recognition algorithms by a technology company would be considered scientific research if it seeks genuine improvement, follows ethical standards, and documents its process.
Disproportionate Effort Exemption
Among setting out other exemptions, the Guidance clarifies the “disproportionate effort” exemption to the right to be informed, as introduced by the DUAA. This exemption permits organizations to refrain from directly providing notice to individuals when reusing personal data for research, archiving, or statistical purposes, but only where doing so would be impossible or would require disproportionate effort. The Guidance notes that in assessing whether the exemption applies, organizations should carefully weigh the effort involved against the potential impact on individuals, considering factors such as the number of people affected, the age of the information, and any safeguards in place. Importantly, even where this exemption is relied upon, organizations must still make privacy information accessible to the public (for example, via their website) and carry out a data protection impact assessment to ensure appropriate protection of individuals' rights and interests.
The ICO consultation on the Guidance is open until April 27, 2026, and may be completed via an online survey here.
Read the ICO press release here. Read the Guidance here.
While Bitcoin and Ethereum continue to move sideways, one major altcoin appears to be quietly building momentum beneath the surface. Growing institutional interest and a tightening technical structure suggest that Solana's price could be positioning itself for a significant move in the coming weeks. Recent data shows cumulative Solana ETF inflows climbing, highlighting rising demand from institutional investors even as the broader crypto market consolidates.
Now that the SOL price action is tightening near key resistance levels, a decisive breakout seems to be approaching. However, it would be interesting to watch whether the price will make it to the $100 threshold or not.
Institutional Demand for Solana Accelerates
The first chart highlights a consistent rise in cumulative inflows into Solana-based ETFs. Since late October, inflows have accelerated significantly, pushing the total to $1.45 billion.
Such steady capital inflows often signal growing institutional confidence in the asset's long-term potential.
Institutional flows typically play a key role in shaping market cycles, as sustained demand from ETFs can absorb supply from the market and provide stronger price support during corrections. In the times when the SOL price has plunged over 57% since the spot ETF launch, it indicates that investors believe in the long term potential of the SOL price. This can be considered as conviction, but not hype, as smart money is getting in.
Solana SOLUSD Price is Forming a Bullish Structure
From a technical perspective, the Solana price has formed a strong bullish structure that aims to reach the highs not tested in the past few weeks. The price is trading within an ascending or rising wedge that usually results in a breakdown below the support. However, after a brief correction, the price is believed to rise and reach higher targets.
The price is currently consolidating between a price range of $82 and $90, with a trendline support around $88. This tightening range indicates that buyers are gradually stepping in at higher levels, compressing price action toward resistance. Momentum indicators are beginning to show early signs of recovery, as RSI has been rising, forming constant higher highs and lows. Besides, DMI underwent a bullish crossover, indicating a drop in selling pressure. Together, these signals suggest that the market could be entering a reaccumulation phase.
What's Next—Key Levels to Watch
For Solana, the next major move will likely depend on how the price reacts around the current resistance zone. If SOL breaks above $92, the next upside target could emerge near $96, which aligns with the projected breakout path of the ascending triangle, opening the door to $100. Failure to hold the $82 support level may invalidate the bullish structure and could push the price back toward $65, where the next major demand zone lies.
The combination of rising institutional ETF inflows and tightening price structure suggests that Solana could be preparing for its next significant move. If institutional demand continues to build while technical support holds, SOL price may be positioned for a breakout in the coming weeks.
FAQs
Solana's price may dip due to short-term profit taking, broader crypto market consolidation, or resistance near $90, even as long-term institutional demand remains strong.
Solana could approach $100 if it breaks above the $92 resistance. Strong ETF inflows and improving momentum suggest a potential bullish breakout.
A sustained move above $92 would confirm bullish momentum for Solana, potentially opening a path toward $96 and the psychological $100 level.
Select market data provided by ICE Data Services. Select reference data provided by FactSet. Copyright © 2026 FactSet Research Systems Inc.Copyright © 2026, American Bankers Association. CUSIP Database provided by FactSet Research Systems Inc. All rights reserved. SEC fillings and other documents provided by Quartr.© 2026 TradingView, Inc.
Follow Us
The AnewZ Opinion section provides a platform for independent voices to share expert perspectives on global and regional issues. The views expressed are solely those of the authors and do not represent the official position of AnewZ
Global market valuation of virtual currencies has surged to an unprecedented $2.73 trillion, approaching half the value of the world's gold reserves. Yet for many investors, the promise of decentralisation is overshadowed by a growing concern: digital assets may be seized without prior warning.
Global market valuation of virtual currencies has surged to an unprecedented $2.73 trillion, approaching half the value of the world's gold reserves. Yet for many investors, the promise of decentralisation is overshadowed by a growing concern: digital assets may be seized without prior warning.
The foundational appeal of virtual currency has long been its perceived immunity to state intervention. The blockchain was designed to function as a vault without a central key. However, the period between 2022 and 2025 has begun to challenge that assumption. During this time, the U.S. government orchestrated the confiscation of more than $30 billion-worth of virtual assets.
Cracking the encryption that protects these assets is an undertaking that goes far beyond the capabilities of private entities or conventional hacking groups. It requires national-level technology - an arsenal of supercomputers and elite cryptographers capable of exploiting minute vulnerabilities in the architecture of the internet. Increasingly, analysts say, highly precise cyber-offensive capabilities are emerging, allowing asset locations to be monitored with near-surgical accuracy and enabling state actors to effectively “break into the bank vault” of the blockchain.
Shrouded in secrecy
One case frequently cited by researchers involved a Cambodian-based entity in 2022. In an operation that remained largely shrouded in secrecy for years, U.S. authorities seized approximately $15 billion worth of Bitcoin. The public and much of the legal community were unaware of the action until 2025, when a formal lawsuit was filed. Critics argue that this “seize first, litigate later” approach illustrates a troubling precedent: the ability of a single power to remove billions of dollars from the global ledger without immediate judicial scrutiny or public transparency.
Bitcoin hits record high as crypto benefits from U.S. reforms
Trump signs landmark crypto bill into law
Moscow Exchange set to launch Bitcoin index amid rising crypto use
The mechanism behind such control is widely believed to lie in the concentration of blockchain infrastructure and security tools. While the technology itself is theoretically borderless, the tools required to secure - or penetrate - these networks remain heavily centralised. In recent years, the U.S. has increasingly treated blockchain security as a strategic asset, restricting the export of advanced cybersecurity technologies to certain nations. The result, observers say, is an uneven ecosystem in which one actor effectively holds both the shield and the sword.
Between 2023 and 2025, this technological reach also extended to the core of the crypto economy: exchanges. Several high-profile platforms, including the prominent Bian exchange, reportedly came under sustained monitoring. By intercepting transaction data and penetrating administrative layers across more than 20 major exchanges worldwide, investigators and state-backed actors are believed to have gained an unusually comprehensive view of the global flow of digital wealth.
Dollar supremacy
Critics warn that such technological dominance could allow a single power to monitor, freeze and ultimately confiscate assets under the framework of legal enforcement. In this view, technological supremacy serves a dual function: protecting the dominance of the U.S. dollar while also providing a mechanism through which wealth may be extracted from the broader digital ecosystem.
The implications for global investors and sovereign states could be significant. The decentralised vision of cryptocurrency assumes a level playing field, yet the reality emerging in 2026 appears increasingly stratified. On one side are the technological “haves”, with the capability to bypass encryption when necessary; on the other are the “have-nots”, whose assets may ultimately be only as secure as the dominant technological powers allow.
As the decade progresses, the question may no longer be whether a digital wallet is encrypted, but who possesses the computing power capable of breaking that encryption. The confiscation of $30 billion in virtual assets sends a clear signal that the digital frontier is rapidly evolving. In this new landscape, the greatest threat to virtual assets may not be market volatility or a prolonged bear market, but the unseen influence of state actors that view the blockchain not as a tool for liberation, but as a new arena for the projection of power.
Tags
News
cryptocurrency
Technology
Economy
Investments
United States
Cambodia
Blockchain
Bitcoin
Global markets
currency
Copied
Cracking the encryption that protects these assets is an undertaking that goes far beyond the capabilities of private entities or conventional hacking groups. It requires national-level technology - an arsenal of supercomputers and elite cryptographers capable of exploiting minute vulnerabilities in the architecture of the internet. Increasingly, analysts say, highly precise cyber-offensive capabilities are emerging, allowing asset locations to be monitored with near-surgical accuracy and enabling state actors to effectively “break into the bank vault” of the blockchain.
Shrouded in secrecy
One case frequently cited by researchers involved a Cambodian-based entity in 2022. In an operation that remained largely shrouded in secrecy for years, U.S. authorities seized approximately $15 billion worth of Bitcoin. The public and much of the legal community were unaware of the action until 2025, when a formal lawsuit was filed. Critics argue that this “seize first, litigate later” approach illustrates a troubling precedent: the ability of a single power to remove billions of dollars from the global ledger without immediate judicial scrutiny or public transparency.
Bitcoin hits record high as crypto benefits from U.S. reforms
Trump signs landmark crypto bill into law
Moscow Exchange set to launch Bitcoin index amid rising crypto use
The mechanism behind such control is widely believed to lie in the concentration of blockchain infrastructure and security tools. While the technology itself is theoretically borderless, the tools required to secure - or penetrate - these networks remain heavily centralised. In recent years, the U.S. has increasingly treated blockchain security as a strategic asset, restricting the export of advanced cybersecurity technologies to certain nations. The result, observers say, is an uneven ecosystem in which one actor effectively holds both the shield and the sword.
Between 2023 and 2025, this technological reach also extended to the core of the crypto economy: exchanges. Several high-profile platforms, including the prominent Bian exchange, reportedly came under sustained monitoring. By intercepting transaction data and penetrating administrative layers across more than 20 major exchanges worldwide, investigators and state-backed actors are believed to have gained an unusually comprehensive view of the global flow of digital wealth.
Dollar supremacy
Critics warn that such technological dominance could allow a single power to monitor, freeze and ultimately confiscate assets under the framework of legal enforcement. In this view, technological supremacy serves a dual function: protecting the dominance of the U.S. dollar while also providing a mechanism through which wealth may be extracted from the broader digital ecosystem.
The implications for global investors and sovereign states could be significant. The decentralised vision of cryptocurrency assumes a level playing field, yet the reality emerging in 2026 appears increasingly stratified. On one side are the technological “haves”, with the capability to bypass encryption when necessary; on the other are the “have-nots”, whose assets may ultimately be only as secure as the dominant technological powers allow.
As the decade progresses, the question may no longer be whether a digital wallet is encrypted, but who possesses the computing power capable of breaking that encryption. The confiscation of $30 billion in virtual assets sends a clear signal that the digital frontier is rapidly evolving. In this new landscape, the greatest threat to virtual assets may not be market volatility or a prolonged bear market, but the unseen influence of state actors that view the blockchain not as a tool for liberation, but as a new arena for the projection of power.
Tags
News
cryptocurrency
Technology
Economy
Investments
United States
Cambodia
Blockchain
Bitcoin
Global markets
currency
Copied
One case frequently cited by researchers involved a Cambodian-based entity in 2022. In an operation that remained largely shrouded in secrecy for years, U.S. authorities seized approximately $15 billion worth of Bitcoin. The public and much of the legal community were unaware of the action until 2025, when a formal lawsuit was filed. Critics argue that this “seize first, litigate later” approach illustrates a troubling precedent: the ability of a single power to remove billions of dollars from the global ledger without immediate judicial scrutiny or public transparency.
Bitcoin hits record high as crypto benefits from U.S. reforms
Trump signs landmark crypto bill into law
Moscow Exchange set to launch Bitcoin index amid rising crypto use
The mechanism behind such control is widely believed to lie in the concentration of blockchain infrastructure and security tools. While the technology itself is theoretically borderless, the tools required to secure - or penetrate - these networks remain heavily centralised. In recent years, the U.S. has increasingly treated blockchain security as a strategic asset, restricting the export of advanced cybersecurity technologies to certain nations. The result, observers say, is an uneven ecosystem in which one actor effectively holds both the shield and the sword.
Between 2023 and 2025, this technological reach also extended to the core of the crypto economy: exchanges. Several high-profile platforms, including the prominent Bian exchange, reportedly came under sustained monitoring. By intercepting transaction data and penetrating administrative layers across more than 20 major exchanges worldwide, investigators and state-backed actors are believed to have gained an unusually comprehensive view of the global flow of digital wealth.
Dollar supremacy
Critics warn that such technological dominance could allow a single power to monitor, freeze and ultimately confiscate assets under the framework of legal enforcement. In this view, technological supremacy serves a dual function: protecting the dominance of the U.S. dollar while also providing a mechanism through which wealth may be extracted from the broader digital ecosystem.
The implications for global investors and sovereign states could be significant. The decentralised vision of cryptocurrency assumes a level playing field, yet the reality emerging in 2026 appears increasingly stratified. On one side are the technological “haves”, with the capability to bypass encryption when necessary; on the other are the “have-nots”, whose assets may ultimately be only as secure as the dominant technological powers allow.
As the decade progresses, the question may no longer be whether a digital wallet is encrypted, but who possesses the computing power capable of breaking that encryption. The confiscation of $30 billion in virtual assets sends a clear signal that the digital frontier is rapidly evolving. In this new landscape, the greatest threat to virtual assets may not be market volatility or a prolonged bear market, but the unseen influence of state actors that view the blockchain not as a tool for liberation, but as a new arena for the projection of power.
Tags
News
cryptocurrency
Technology
Economy
Investments
United States
Cambodia
Blockchain
Bitcoin
Global markets
currency
Copied
The mechanism behind such control is widely believed to lie in the concentration of blockchain infrastructure and security tools. While the technology itself is theoretically borderless, the tools required to secure - or penetrate - these networks remain heavily centralised. In recent years, the U.S. has increasingly treated blockchain security as a strategic asset, restricting the export of advanced cybersecurity technologies to certain nations. The result, observers say, is an uneven ecosystem in which one actor effectively holds both the shield and the sword.
Between 2023 and 2025, this technological reach also extended to the core of the crypto economy: exchanges. Several high-profile platforms, including the prominent Bian exchange, reportedly came under sustained monitoring. By intercepting transaction data and penetrating administrative layers across more than 20 major exchanges worldwide, investigators and state-backed actors are believed to have gained an unusually comprehensive view of the global flow of digital wealth.
Dollar supremacy
Critics warn that such technological dominance could allow a single power to monitor, freeze and ultimately confiscate assets under the framework of legal enforcement. In this view, technological supremacy serves a dual function: protecting the dominance of the U.S. dollar while also providing a mechanism through which wealth may be extracted from the broader digital ecosystem.
The implications for global investors and sovereign states could be significant. The decentralised vision of cryptocurrency assumes a level playing field, yet the reality emerging in 2026 appears increasingly stratified. On one side are the technological “haves”, with the capability to bypass encryption when necessary; on the other are the “have-nots”, whose assets may ultimately be only as secure as the dominant technological powers allow.
As the decade progresses, the question may no longer be whether a digital wallet is encrypted, but who possesses the computing power capable of breaking that encryption. The confiscation of $30 billion in virtual assets sends a clear signal that the digital frontier is rapidly evolving. In this new landscape, the greatest threat to virtual assets may not be market volatility or a prolonged bear market, but the unseen influence of state actors that view the blockchain not as a tool for liberation, but as a new arena for the projection of power.
Tags
News
cryptocurrency
Technology
Economy
Investments
United States
Cambodia
Blockchain
Bitcoin
Global markets
currency
Copied
Between 2023 and 2025, this technological reach also extended to the core of the crypto economy: exchanges. Several high-profile platforms, including the prominent Bian exchange, reportedly came under sustained monitoring. By intercepting transaction data and penetrating administrative layers across more than 20 major exchanges worldwide, investigators and state-backed actors are believed to have gained an unusually comprehensive view of the global flow of digital wealth.
Dollar supremacy
Critics warn that such technological dominance could allow a single power to monitor, freeze and ultimately confiscate assets under the framework of legal enforcement. In this view, technological supremacy serves a dual function: protecting the dominance of the U.S. dollar while also providing a mechanism through which wealth may be extracted from the broader digital ecosystem.
The implications for global investors and sovereign states could be significant. The decentralised vision of cryptocurrency assumes a level playing field, yet the reality emerging in 2026 appears increasingly stratified. On one side are the technological “haves”, with the capability to bypass encryption when necessary; on the other are the “have-nots”, whose assets may ultimately be only as secure as the dominant technological powers allow.
As the decade progresses, the question may no longer be whether a digital wallet is encrypted, but who possesses the computing power capable of breaking that encryption. The confiscation of $30 billion in virtual assets sends a clear signal that the digital frontier is rapidly evolving. In this new landscape, the greatest threat to virtual assets may not be market volatility or a prolonged bear market, but the unseen influence of state actors that view the blockchain not as a tool for liberation, but as a new arena for the projection of power.
Tags
News
cryptocurrency
Technology
Economy
Investments
United States
Cambodia
Blockchain
Bitcoin
Global markets
currency
Copied
Critics warn that such technological dominance could allow a single power to monitor, freeze and ultimately confiscate assets under the framework of legal enforcement. In this view, technological supremacy serves a dual function: protecting the dominance of the U.S. dollar while also providing a mechanism through which wealth may be extracted from the broader digital ecosystem.
The implications for global investors and sovereign states could be significant. The decentralised vision of cryptocurrency assumes a level playing field, yet the reality emerging in 2026 appears increasingly stratified. On one side are the technological “haves”, with the capability to bypass encryption when necessary; on the other are the “have-nots”, whose assets may ultimately be only as secure as the dominant technological powers allow.
As the decade progresses, the question may no longer be whether a digital wallet is encrypted, but who possesses the computing power capable of breaking that encryption. The confiscation of $30 billion in virtual assets sends a clear signal that the digital frontier is rapidly evolving. In this new landscape, the greatest threat to virtual assets may not be market volatility or a prolonged bear market, but the unseen influence of state actors that view the blockchain not as a tool for liberation, but as a new arena for the projection of power.
Tags
News
cryptocurrency
Technology
Economy
Investments
United States
Cambodia
Blockchain
Bitcoin
Global markets
currency
Copied
The implications for global investors and sovereign states could be significant. The decentralised vision of cryptocurrency assumes a level playing field, yet the reality emerging in 2026 appears increasingly stratified. On one side are the technological “haves”, with the capability to bypass encryption when necessary; on the other are the “have-nots”, whose assets may ultimately be only as secure as the dominant technological powers allow.
As the decade progresses, the question may no longer be whether a digital wallet is encrypted, but who possesses the computing power capable of breaking that encryption. The confiscation of $30 billion in virtual assets sends a clear signal that the digital frontier is rapidly evolving. In this new landscape, the greatest threat to virtual assets may not be market volatility or a prolonged bear market, but the unseen influence of state actors that view the blockchain not as a tool for liberation, but as a new arena for the projection of power.
Tags
News
cryptocurrency
Technology
Economy
Investments
United States
Cambodia
Blockchain
Bitcoin
Global markets
currency
Copied
As the decade progresses, the question may no longer be whether a digital wallet is encrypted, but who possesses the computing power capable of breaking that encryption. The confiscation of $30 billion in virtual assets sends a clear signal that the digital frontier is rapidly evolving. In this new landscape, the greatest threat to virtual assets may not be market volatility or a prolonged bear market, but the unseen influence of state actors that view the blockchain not as a tool for liberation, but as a new arena for the projection of power.
Tags
News
cryptocurrency
Technology
Economy
Investments
United States
Cambodia
Blockchain
Bitcoin
Global markets
currency
Copied
U.S. President Donald Trump has demanded Iran's “unconditional surrender,” almost a week into the c...
Newly released FBI records summarising interviews with an unidentified woman contain allegations that U.S. President Donald Trump attempted to forc...
The Israeli military says it has destroyed an underground bunker beneath Iran's leadership complex in Tehran...
Chinese electric vehicle giant BYD is pushing to make charging an electric car almost as quick and convenient as f...
Türkiye has said it is “closely monitoring” the movements of the so-called Kurdistan Free Life Party...
U.S. President Donald Trump has demanded Iran's “unconditional surrender,” almost a week into the conflict with Tehran. Trump made the comments on social media on Friday (6 March), hours after the Iranian president said unspecified countries had begun mediation efforts.
The Israeli military says it has destroyed an underground bunker beneath Iran's leadership complex in Tehran that it claims was built for former supreme leader Ali Khamenei.
Key humanitarian air, sea and land routes are being constricted by disruption from the war in the Middle East, delaying life-saving shipments to some of the world's worst crises, 10 aid officials have told Reuters.
Some changes are immediately visible: new turbines on the steppe, solar panels on rooftops, and figures in reports. Other changes mature in silence - but transform everything. Azerbaijan, for decades associated with black gold, is now writing a new chapter.
Leave the first comment
In an exclusive interview with AnewZ, Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said the Islamic Republic is "not targeting neighbouring countries," amid reports of drone strikes on Nakhchivan International Airport on Thursday (5 March).
Trump tells Axios he wants direct involvement in who takes over as Iran's next leader, rejecting Khamenei's son as "unacceptable" and citing the need for a figure who can bring "peace and harmony".
Officials in Azerbaijan have said they have stopped terror attacks in Azerbaijan including on an Israeli Embassy, the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline and a Synagogue. Tensions between regional and global powers escalate. Military activity, security alerts and travel disruptions continue.
Türkiye and Iran's foreign ministers spoke by phone after reports that a ballistic missile entered Turkish airspace, with Tehran denying responsibility and insisting its recent strikes targeted only U.S. and Israeli facilities.
China has called on Afghanistan and Pakistan to resolve their growing border dispute through dialogue and diplomatic channels, as clashes between their security forces entered a seventh day and left more than 160 people dead or injured, according to the United Nations.
In the Middle East, wars rarely remain confined to battlefields. Their most profound and enduring consequences are often measured not in military victories but in human displacement.
Some changes are immediately visible: new turbines on the steppe, solar panels on rooftops, and figures in reports. Other changes mature in silence - but transform everything. Azerbaijan, for decades associated with black gold, is now writing a new chapter.
As the 2026 Spring Festival draws to a close, fresh data suggests China's holiday spending boom reflects more than peak consumption. It points to a deeper structural transition, as consumers shift from buying more goods to buying in different ways.
Against a backdrop of mounting environmental pressure across Central Asia, the Kazakh Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources has announced that the Regional Ecological Summit (RES) 2026 will take place from 22–24 April in Astana.
In an era of accelerating geopolitical realignments and shifts in the global economy, Azerbaijan is expanding its foreign policy beyond traditional regional confines. Southeast Asia has emerged as a key frontier in this evolving multi-vector strategy.
You can download the AnewZ application from Play Store and the App Store.
Follow Us
Copyright © AnewZ 2024 - 2026
News CMS for Publishers by BIGCMS.NET
Get magazine delivered to your doorstep
Get latest issue delivered instantly
Only in Delhi-NCR, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Pune, Lucknow & Kolkata
Get magazine delivered to your doorstep
Get latest issue delivered instantly
Only in Delhi-NCR, Mumbai, Bengaluru, Pune, Lucknow & Kolkata
Central banks of both countries are exploring a digital currency corridor that could enable faster, cheaper cross-border payments for millions of Indians
India and the UAE are exploring a connection between their sovereign digital currencies to enable instant wallet-to-wallet cross-border transfers.
The move could significantly benefit over 4 million Indians in the UAE, one of the largest sources of remittances to India.
Deputy Governor T. Rabi Sankar says central bank digital currencies protect monetary sovereignty and offer blockchain efficiency without the risks of private tokens.
India and the UAE may soon experience instant money transfers as the central banks of both countries are working to link their sovereign digital currencies, Mint reported, citing sources. As one of the top sources of remittances to India, the move will significantly benefit over 4 million Indians. The Reserve Bank of India has been developing the central bank digital currency (CBDC), which allows transactions of money directly from wallet to wallet without banks acting as intermediaries.
According to the report, both retail transactions as well as large-value transactions are expected to benefit from such a linkage.
2 March 2026
Get the latest issue of Outlook Business
As per RBI data, over 8 million Indians currently use the e-Rupee, with transactions totalling ₹28,000 crore and 120 million transactions recorded till December. According to the report, Emirati entities such as LuLu Group, DP World, and Emaar Properties operate significant businesses in India. Indian conglomerates such as Larsen & Toubro, Tata Group, and Reliance Industries also have large operations in the UAE.
RBI Deputy Governor T. Rabi Sankar has been calling for the development of CBDCs over stablecoins as a form of cryptocurrency. Sankar has also been vocal about how stablecoins do not serve a purpose that fiat money cannot serve better.
Unlike bitcoin or stablecoins, the RBI supports central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) mainly because they protect monetary sovereignty, meaning the central bank's control over a country's money.
Sankar argues that while stablecoins may be tied to the value of regular currencies, they are still privately issued digital money and do not carry the same guarantee as money issued by a central bank. Because of this, they could weaken the RBI's ability to control the money supply and influence interest rates.
BY S Ravi
In contrast, India's e-Rupee can offer the technological advantages of blockchain—such as programmable payments and instant settlement—while still being fully backed and regulated by the central bank. This makes it safer and more stable than privately issued digital tokens.
CBDCs can also make cross-border payments simpler and cheaper. For example, in the India–UAE payment link, using CBDCs can reduce the long chain of intermediary banks involved in traditional transfers. This lowers transaction costs and reduces settlement risks.
Sankar strongly suggests that governments should provide a state-backed digital currency that works as efficiently as crypto but remains as safe and trustworthy as physical cash.
Click/Scan to Subscribe
WATCH | Inside Tata Motors' Reinvention: Leadership, EVs & India's SUV Shift
WATCH|Is Pollution the Price of Growth? Michael Greenstone Explains
WATCH | Gig Economy in India: Freedom or “Prisoners on Wheels”?
Pax Silica | Watch Policy Decoder
500 Jobs Gone: Flipkart Joins Layoff Wave With Its Biggest Cut in Recent Memory
Oracle Is Laying Off Thousands; AI Is Both The Cause And The Excuse
Reliance Jio's Much-Awaited Stock Market Debut Hits Regulatory Roadblock
Karnataka First Indian State to Ban Social Media for Under-16: Here's What We Know
Motoverse 2025: 40,000 Bike Enthusiasts Attend The Three-Day Motorcycling Fest In Goa
Union Budget 2025: FM Sitharaman Announces No Income Tax Payable Up To Income of Rs 12 Lakh
Union Budget 2025: Celebrating India's Economic Tradition With Halwa Ceremony| See Photos
Your Shortcut to Sharp ThinkingAdd Outlook Business to your inbox-get the latest business insights
Copyright © 2026 Outlook Publishing India Pvt Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 Outlook Publishing India Pvt Ltd. All pages of the Website are subject to our terms and conditions and privacy policy. You must not reproduce, duplicate, copy, sell, resell or exploit any material on the Website for any commercial purposes.
Get behind the headlines
Seoul has announced a new plan to establish a blockchain-based “peace trade system” that would allow North Korea to export minerals under international oversight, despite Pyongyang's rejection of all inter-Korean dialogue at its recent Ninth Party Congress.
The proposal is part of a “Korean Peninsula Peace Package” that the Unification Ministry released on Friday, laying out a strategy promoting “peaceful coexistence” with the DPRK through new variants of recycled policies.
Seoul has announced a new plan to establish a blockchain-based “peace trade system” that would allow North Korea to export minerals under international oversight, despite Pyongyang's rejection of all inter-Korean dialogue at its recent Ninth Party Congress.
The proposal is part of a “Korean Peninsula Peace Package” that the Unification Ministry released on Friday, laying out a strategy promoting “peaceful coexistence” with the DPRK through new variants of recycled policies.
© Korea Risk Group. All rights reserved.
No part of this content may be reproduced, distributed, or used for
commercial purposes without prior written permission from Korea Risk Group.
Get the Daily Update
Please check your inbox, for an email we just sent you, and click on the confirmation message in it to get subscribed to our Daily News Update.
Joon Ha Park is a correspondent at Korea Risk Group. He has previously written on issues related to the two Koreas at The Peninsula Report, and appeared on ABC News Australia, Deutsche Welle and Monocle Radio. He specializes in offering in-depth analyses of South Korea's defense policy, security relations and domestic politics for Korea Pro.
Shreyas Reddy is the Lead Correspondent at NK News, based in Seoul. He previously worked as a researcher at BBC Monitoring, where his work focused on news and key people and organizations from the Korean Peninsula, Japan, Southeast Asia and the Pacific. Follow him on Twitter.
Specialist news and analysis,
research tools, and unique data sets
Internet Explorer is not compatible with this website. We instead recommend using Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
Microsoft ceased supporting IE 10 and older in 2016.
In addition, Microsoft cyber-security chief Chris Jackson has been urging users to stop using the browser since February 2019.
Join the influential community of members who rely on NK News original news and in-depth reporting
Enter your details below
Email Address
Password
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
Sign In
Forgot Password?
Don't have an account? SIGN UP
Join the influential community of members who rely on NK News original news and in-depth reporting
For more pricing options, click here.
Already have an account? SIGN IN
Join the influential community of members who rely on NK News original news and in-depth reporting
Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.
Email Address
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
Send Email
Don't have an account? SIGN UP
Get the Daily Update
In February, the UK government introduced draft legislation before Parliament for the regulation of cryptoassets. Under the new regime, the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) will be given powers to regulate the growing cryptoasset sector – including cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, stablecoins and non-fungible tokens – in much the same way as it does traditional financial services companies.
The regulatory plans seek to balance the promotion of innovation and competition while protecting market integrity and consumers. They set out what some commentators describe as a ‘third way' between America's regulatory approach and that of the EU. The UK government hopes that by establishing a comprehensive regulatory regime for cryptoassets, transparency and oversight will be enhanced, making it easier to detect suspicious activity, enforce sanctions and hold businesses to account where they fall short. It also sees the new regulatory regime as assisting the UK in its attempt to become a global hub for digital finance.
The FCA defines cryptoassets as ‘cryptographically secured digital representations of value or contractual rights that use some type of distributed ledger technology and can be transferred, stored or traded electronically.'
Currently, not all cryptoassets are fully regulated by the FCA, although all companies in the sector must comply with rules regarding advertising to consumers, anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing. The UK government originally set out proposals to create a financial services regulatory regime for cryptoassets in 2023. Draft statutory provisions were then introduced in spring 2025 before the relevant legislation was laid before Parliament in recent months. Bringing cryptoassets into the regulatory perimeter is a ‘crucial step in securing the UK's position as a world-leading financial centre in the digital age,' said the Rt Hon Rachel Reeves, the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Andrea Huber
Co-Chair, IBA Banking Regulation Subcommittee
The FCA has issued a series of consultations – which closed in February – about its regulatory plans, and the UK has also outlined a prudential regime for cryptoasset companies. The FCA's consultations covered key areas such as how cryptoassets should be listed and what companies must tell investors, as well as the compliance standards for exchanges to ensure trading is safe and reliable.
The FCA will also introduce measures to prevent insider trading and requirements for brokers and other middlemen to ensure they act responsibly. Crucially, the FCA wants cryptoasset companies to have in place the same kind of financial safeguards as traditional financial services so they're better able to manage risk. Under the FCA's roadmap, final rules are due to be published midway through 2026 and come into force in 2027.
The UK's new rules will bring the country more in line with the US, which has already extended financial regulations to companies and products in the sector. However, closer alignment with the US puts the UK at odds with the EU, which has created sector-specific rules under its Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCAR), which came into full effect at the end of 2024. While the EU rules have the benefit of being harmonised across the 27 Member State bloc, the UK hopes the integration of its cryptoasset rules with those of traditional financial services companies will provide an incentive for such businesses to locate to the country and develop deeper services more easily.
Andrea Huber, Co-Chair of the IBA Banking Regulation Subcommittee, says the UK's approach ‘has real advantages, but also some predictable friction points.' She believes that the UK choosing to deliberately carve out a distinct regulatory path for the cryptoasset sector, separate from both the EU and the US, ‘has merit', but adds that ‘whether that strategy succeeds depends less on difference as such and more on how divergence is calibrated and managed.'
Switzerland, says Huber – who's a partner in the Zurich office of law firm Pestalozzi – has long resisted ‘specific' legislation as a starting point. Instead, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority applies existing financial market law where functions and risks justify it, and targeted adaptations where distributed ledger technology creates new risk mechanics – for example, relating to smart contracts. ‘The UK's intent to regulate activities rather than labels is therefore conceptually aligned with Swiss thinking, even if the technical implementation will differ,' she says. ‘That said, regulatory divergence carries certain systemic and legal risks, particularly for an industry that matured without rules.'
Huber says the UK is probably trying to chart a third way that's more flexible than the EU, but more structured than the US. However, she adds that ‘the real danger is not divergence per se, but uncoordinated divergence in a borderless market.' The cryptoasset sector doesn't need ‘lighter rules than traditional finance,' she says, ‘but it does need smarter, interoperable ones.'
Marc Mouton, a partner at law firm Arendt in Luxembourg, says it'll be interesting to see if the UK follows the moves by some EU regulators to clamp down on third-country cryptoasset exchanges that have been able to exploit loopholes in MiCAR – primarily, the ability to reach EU clients via intermediaries that have cryptoasset service provider status and who provide brokerage services to clients in the bloc.
Ian O'Mara, a partner at law firm Matheson in Dublin, says divergence between the UK and the EU ‘is unsurprising' as the cryptoasset regime will be one of the first regulatory frameworks that the UK ‘will devise post-Brexit from scratch'. He highlights that since MiCAR was only adopted in the EU in 2023, only a few years after Brexit, the UK ‘has had a completely blank slate to work with.'
He adds that the UK has had a ‘second-mover' advantage in terms of assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the approaches taken by other major jurisdictions such as the EU, the US and Switzerland and being able to position its cryptoasset industry regulation differently. If the UK approach ends up being successful in both attracting reputable cryptoasset companies and safeguarding consumers, it might inform future reforms within the EU, says O'Mara.
However, he doesn't believe that the UK's approach will be light-touch or more willing to accept risky practices. ‘The UK has, and continues to have, a strong emphasis on consumer protection in financial services and for that reason we do not anticipate major divergence,' he says.
Header image: andy/Adobe Stock
International Bar Association 2026 ©
Privacy policy
Terms & conditions
Cookie Settings
Harassment policy
International Bar Association is incorporated as a Not-for-Profit Corporation under the laws of the State of New York in the United States of America and is registered with the Department of State of the State of New York with registration number 071114000655 - and the liability of its members is limited. Its registered address in New York is c/o Capitol Services Inc, 1218 Central Avenue, Suite 100, Albany, New York 12205.
The London office of International Bar Association is registered in England and Wales as a branch with registration number FC028342.
On March 5, 2026, officials from the Russian Ministry of Finance announced they are accelerating work on a dedicated stablecoin bill designed to capitalize on what they describe as “colossal potential” for the national economy. Alexey Yakovlev, a senior official at the ministry, indicated that the government intends to tackle stablecoin regulation as soon as the State Duma approves a primary law banning citizens from trading on unpermitted platforms. This sequence of legislation is expected to move forward during the spring session, with the goal of having a segregated regulatory framework for stablecoins in place by July 2026. Currently, stablecoins occupy a legal grey area in Russia, but the ministry aims to redress this by defining them as a specific form of digital currency that can serve domestic economic interests. By regulating stablecoins separately, Moscow hopes to create a “hardened” digital settlement layer that can facilitate trade and financial stability without the volatility associated with traditional crypto assets, while maintaining a degree of oversight that aligns with the Central Bank's broader digital ruble initiatives.
The legislative push coincides with a major proposal from the Central Bank of Russia (CBR), which suggests allowing commercial banks and brokers to obtain crypto exchange licenses via a simple notification process. During an annual meeting with lending institutions, CBR Governor Elvira Nabiullina emphasized that banks' extensive experience in anti-money laundering and fraud prevention makes them ideal intermediaries for a legalized crypto market. Under this proposal, banks would be permitted to act as crypto intermediaries based on their existing licenses, though the CBR intends to limit the risk exposure to just one percent of a bank's capital initially. This conservative “one percent cap” is designed to allow the traditional financial sector to test the waters of digital asset services while maintaining systemic stability. The central bank's shift from its historically skeptical stance to an active regulatory role signals a pragmatic turn in Russian financial policy, aiming to transition crypto exchange activity from offshore market operators to supervised domestic banks.
A key driver behind the new stablecoin bill is the Russian government's increasing reliance on ruble-backed and fiat-pegged assets for cross-border trade. Chainalysis data has already highlighted the massive impact of ruble-backed stablecoins like the A7A5, which reportedly processed over 93 billion dollars in transactions within a single year, acting as a critical bridge for sanctioned firms to access global markets. Ministry officials have acknowledged that stablecoins, which they distinguish from “freewheeling” cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, have already become an “industrial scale” settlement rail. By formalizing this sector, the Kremlin aims to legitimize these “purpose-built” financial tools, providing Russian businesses with a regulated, high-speed alternative to legacy international payment systems. As the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank continue their discussions with market players, the final bill is expected to establish clear rules for issuance and use, positioning stablecoins as a cornerstone of Russia's 2026 strategy for financial sovereignty and sanctions resilience.
Subscribe
Unit No: BA857 DMCC Business Centre Level No 1 Jewellery & Gemplex 3 Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
International House, 10 Admirals Way, London, England, E14 9XL.
Something went wrong
Quantum Blockchain Technologies PLC (AIM:QBT, FRA:BYA1) told investors it has taken a step toward commercial testing of its bitcoin-mining software after receiving the first mining rig from one of the ASIC manufacturers it is seeking to partner with.
"We are delighted that we have received the first Bitcoin mining rig and MDK with which to prove the enhanced mining efficiency of our AI Oracle software," said chief executive Francesco Gardin. "To give us the best chance of success, we are focusing on testing the rigs of one manufacturer at a time, in order to shorten this current phase in the commercialisation of our products."
The AIM-listed group said initial checks on the rig's nominal specifications have already been completed by US-based consultants, with delivery to its Milan University lab expected within the next week.
The manufacturer has also provided source code, technical documents and a mining development kit, allowing QBT's research team to begin analysing the rig's software and architecture before porting its Method C AI Oracle onto the machine.
QBT said the software version of Method C can run on the rig's control board rather than being embedded directly into the ASIC chip, a route it said could save more than a year of collaborative work.
It also said the software can assess the full mining “job” and its variants, rather than examining single bits of the header, which broadens its scope during testing.
The company has assigned a seven-person specialist team to the project and said the next phase will move through data collection, software integration and live-mining performance testing.
Francesco Gardin added: "A successful outcome in our Milan lab will, we believe, be the precondition to entering into contractual discussions with the ASIC manufacturer."
Error while retrieving data
Error while retrieving data
Sign in to access your portfolio
Error while retrieving data
Error while retrieving data
Error while retrieving data
Stay informed with the leading news, updates and opinions across the legal sector
Lawyer intelligence insight & analysis to inform your strategic planning
The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has fined US based social news service Reddit £14.5m for using the data of children under the age of 13 unlawfully and potentially exposing them to inappropriate and harmful content. This represents the largest ICO fine to date for a breach of children's privacy and is the third largest fine the ICO has issued (after a £20m fine for a British Airways data breach, and an £18.4m fine for the Marriott Hotel group in 2014).
Continue reading
Access breaking news, comment and unrivalled data-rich analysis about the stories happening in the legal market by subscribing to The Lawyer today.
Copyright © 2026 TheLawyer.com Limited and / or its subsidiaries and licensors. All rights reserved.
Thelawyer.com Limited Registered in England and Wales with number 11491880. Registered office at 1-2 Paris Garden, Southwark, London SE1 8ND
Altcoins with real-world traction and applications will be the winners of the next altcoin season, according to Bitwise investment chief Matt Hougan.
The euphoric altcoin seasons in which almost every cryptocurrency rises across the market are probably not coming back, Hougan said.
“I think that game is over. I think we'll see a non-traditional altcoin season,” he said in an interview on Wednesday. “An altcoin season that rewards assets with real-world traction and applications.”
“I don't think we'll see the sort of rising tide lifts all buckets where you rotate from Bitcoin to ETH to DeFi to NFT pictures of rocks.”
Hougan said future altcoin seasons could instead see the market “rerate” certain tokens, particularly those tied to what he described as “huge businesses.”
Altcoin season likely to be “more differentiated”
“I just think it'll be more differentiated than previous altcoin seasons,” Hougan said.
Crypto traders typically expect, based on past cycles, that Bitcoin (BTC) would first reach new all-time highs, then capital will rotate into Ether (ETH) and then into altcoins, kicking off altcoin season.
As for Bitcoin, which recently fell as low as $60,000 in February, Hougan said it was “starting to bottom and trend higher.” Bitcoin is trading at $70,237 at the time of publication, according to CoinMarketCap.
Altcoin season debate continues
The altcoin season debate has divided the crypto industry, with crypto analyst Matthew Hyland saying in November that traders should have confidence in an altcoin season arriving soon, citing the Bitcoin dominance chart as “bearish for many weeks.”
Related: 38% of altcoins near all-time lows, worse than FTX crash: Analyst
In December, BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes said, “There is always an altcoin season happening.”
“[If you're] always saying altcoin season isn't there, [it's] because you didn't own what went up,” Hayes said.
Crypto sentiment platform Santiment said on Wednesday that mentions of altcoins on social media reached their lowest level in two years, while indicators suggest investors are focusing on Bitcoin.
Select market data provided by ICE Data Services. Select reference data provided by FactSet. Copyright © 2026 FactSet Research Systems Inc.Copyright © 2026, American Bankers Association. CUSIP Database provided by FactSet Research Systems Inc. All rights reserved. SEC fillings and other documents provided by Quartr.© 2026 TradingView, Inc.
Do you like numbers? Do you like retail technology news? Then this is the article for you. Including Simbe, Cart.com, Shopify, SportsShoes, Greggs, InPost, On, Sainsbury's, EE, Amazon, Wickes, and the Cardano Foundation.
3...EE is bringing its experiential format to London's Oxford Street.
This is the third experiential store launched by EE in the capital, alongside the flagship Studio in Westfield, White City and Experience store in Westfield, Stratford.
The launch is part of the company's £3 million investment into bricks and mortar retail over the last ten months as it rolls out the experiential format across the UK. The Oxford Street store has been designed to help customers get hands-on with the latest smart tech, while also providing expert support from staff for those looking for help with their devices.
Asif Aziz, Retail Director at EE, comments: “We are so proud to bring our experiential format to one of the busiest retail destinations in the UK. The role of high streets is changing, and we know shoppers want more than just a transaction; they want experiences and personal connection.”
“We designed our Oxford Street Experience Local store to be a space where shoppers can get hands-on with the latest launches and discover how technology can enhance their every day, with the expert support of our fantastic EE Guides on the UK's best network.”
137...The Cardano Foundation, a Swiss-based, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to advancing Cardano as a public digital infrastructure, reports the integration of the Cardano blockchain into DFX.swiss's platform.
At the core of this move is Open Crypto Pay, a crypto payment standard developed by DFX.swiss. Through the integration of Cardano, customers can now pay with the cryptocurrency ADA in 137 SPAR stores across Switzerland.
Payments are processed in real-time and without reliance on centralised exchanges. The payment function of Open Crypto Pay also allows ADA tokens from native ADA wallets to be used directly at the checkout for payment.
According to those involved, a key benefit for merchants lies in significantly lower transaction costs: compared to traditional card and payment providers, transaction fees can be reduced by around two thirds with Open Crypto Pay.
"We're witnessing the beginning of a fundamental shift in how value moves through society," says Frederik Gregaard, CEO at the Cardano Foundation. "When blockchain becomes invisible infrastructure - when paying with ADA is as natural as using a card - we've moved beyond the experimental phase into genuine financial transformation. This partnership is planting seeds for an ecosystem where digital and traditional finance aren't separate worlds, but one seamless experience."
$180 million...Cart.com, a unified commerce and logistics solutions provider, has announced a $180 million growth equity investment led by Springcoast Partners.
Springcoast is joining existing investors PayPal Ventures, Arsenal Growth Equity, Mercury Fund, and Oak HC/FT.
“This investment will strengthen our balance sheet and provide us with the flexibility to accelerate our strategic priorities,” says Omair Tariq, Chief Executive Officer at Cart.com. “We've built a platform that combines commerce software with a scaled logistics network, and we're just getting started. With long-term capital and aligned partners, we believe we can accelerate innovation across our platform, expand our AI capabilities, continue improving automation across our operations, and pursue sustainable profitability as we grow.”
“In an increasingly fragmented commerce landscape, Cart.com has differentiated itself by uniting enterprise software with physical logistics,” says Evan Nawrocki, Principal at Springcoast Partners. “Their end-to-end offering and demonstrable ROI for enterprise customers makes them an outlier in commerce enablement technology. We're excited to partner with Omair and the team to drive the next phase of profitable growth.”
1...Simbe says that it has become the first retail technology company to achieve UL 3300 certification, a standard for service, communication, information, education and entertainment robots, from UL Solutions for Tally, its shelf scanning autonomous mobile robot.
"Since 2015, we've designed Tally to earn trust from shoppers navigating aisles, store teams working alongside it, and the retailers deploying it at scale," says Jeff Gee, Chief Design Officer at Simbe.
"This UL 3300 certification confirms what our retail partners, and their store teams and customers, experience daily: Tally is retail's favourite robot because it operates safely in the real world. This milestone reflects our commitment to people ffirst automation."
As part of the UL 3300 evaluation, Tally passed over 40 safety tests focused on its ability to operate safely and reliably in retail settings.
14...UK running and fitness retailer, SportsShoes, has opened a flagship store at 113 Shoreditch High Street in London, its first retail space in over 14 years.
In a LinkedIn post, Maissa Fatté, Enterprise Sales Northern Europe at Shopify, said: “Huge congrats to SportsShoes.com for the opening of House of SportsShoes - an incredible experiential flagship in the lead up to the London Marathon this April.”
She added: “The store operates as a digital first hub for runners, offering an amazing shoe range, a running lab for gait analysis, and a dedicated events floor for community, athlete sessions and brand activations.”
“Love the ‘no bags, no hassle' concept where customers try products in-store and have them delivered to their home the next day! The store tills are powered by Shopify PoS, making the in-store purchase even more hassle free.”
1...Warner Bros. Global Experiences is gearing up to open its first flagship shop in London, joining a King's Cross location, as the UK's only official Harry Potter retail destinations.
This will open during the autumn and will be located at The Ribbon, 134-140 Oxford Street, covering 21,000 sq ft across two floors.
Karl Durrant, WB's SVP Worldwide Retail, says: “Harry Potter is deeply rooted in British storytelling, and this will give fans an exciting new way to experience this magical world in the city that features so prominently in the stories. Offering a completely new retail experience for Harry Potter fans which will delight and entertain, it's going to be very special.”
The new location will join the collection of Harry Potter experiences owned and operated by Warner Bros. in London, including Warner Bros. Studio Tour London - The Making of Harry Potter.
15...Amazon has launched its Amazon Now service in Brazil, promising to deliver essentials and groceries in 15 minutes.
This went live this week in Sao Paulo and will expand to seven other cities by 9th March. "Brazil has become a priority among the countries in which Amazon invests in the world. It is the highest investment priority today," said Country Head Juliana Sztrajtman.
In making this move, Amazon has dropped a bombshell in the grocery delivery wars, according to Brittain Ladd, a supply chain consultant and former Amazon executive.
In a LinkedIn post, he said: “This isn't just another same-day push, it's ultra-fast quick commerce hitting a high priority market, leveraging Amazon's optimised micro-fulfillment hubs and logistics muscle to deliver perishables at speeds that redefine convenience. The move is already pressuring local players like iFood, Rappi, and even Mercado Libre (whose stock dipped on the news).”
50%...Salvation Army charity shops across the UK have seen a 50% increase in Gift Aid sign-ups after introducing new digital technology.
The changes have been rolled out by Salvation Army Trading Company - the trading arm of The Salvation Army - in partnership with charity gift aid and retail technology specialist BMc Azurri, part of the Barron McCann group.
The changes mean customers now experience faster transactions, shorter queues, easier donation options and a more inclusive, modern retail environment. And the additional money raised helps support The Salvation Army's work with vulnerable people in communities across the UK.
The technology has been introduced in more than 250 charity shops and donation centres. The charity decided to modernise its retail systems to deal with the increased volume of donations and also customer expectations.
Paper-based processes - particularly for Gift Aid sign-ups - were creating administrative delays, data errors and missed fundraising opportunities. Donors can now sign up online, via QR codes, on in-store devices or at self-service stations.
Mobile PoS systems have also been rolled out to help manage busy periods, particularly during donation centre openings and peak trading times. The technology reduces queues and allows staff and volunteers to process transactions more efficiently. Self-service donation points now enable donors to independently label and drop off items.
£2.2 billion...Greggs' full-year sales rose 6.8% to £2.2 billion. Underlying operating profit fell by 4.0% to £188 million.
Aarin Chiekrie, Equity Analyst, Hargreaves Lansdown, says: “Greggs served up a strong finish to the year, with sales growth accelerating in the final quarter as customers tucked into more of its freshly baked goods. This comes as the group's new scooped up market share, helped by improved menus, later opening hours, and 121 net new store openings over the year, although the latter was a touch lower than originally planned."
"But the cost picture has been a major challenge, largely driven by a handful of unhelpful changes to tax rules and minimum wages. Alongside that, setting up two new distribution centres in 2025 has been costly, and altogether, it's led to full-year operating profits falling 4.0% to £188 million."
Chiekrie adds: "Despite the challenges, Greggs is working hard to build the foundations for future growth. The number of shops is set to rise from 2,739 to around 3,000 over the next few years as it looks to become more accessible to more people. Menus are being adapted to changing customer preferences, and shops are staying open later to cash in on more evening customers - the group's fastest growing day-part. In fact, nearly 75% of its stores are now open beyond 5pm."
"The balance sheet is in a good position, and plenty of liquidity on hand. With cost inflation set to ease this year, guidance for underlying profits to remain broadly flat looks a touch conservative. Especially given that peak investment in building out its infrastructure for future growth has passed. As long as conditions don't sour too much for the UK consumer, there could be more than tasty treats in store for Greggs.”
95%...New research from InPost shows that 95% of adults receive a parcel each month, with an average person receiving six, yet 40% miss at least one delivery. Trust in home delivery is eroding, making ‘parcel anxiety' a routine part of online shopping.
Home delivery is also eating into people's time and eroding their sense of control. Roughly one-third of parcels fail on the first attempt, forcing consumers to spend an average of 3.2 hours waiting at home and a further 2.3 hours sorting out missed deliveries.
Michael Rouse, CEO International, InPost UK, comments: “Home delivery should not require households to donate half a day to their doorbell. The data shows a meaningful loss in time and control for customers, plus further operational complications for merchants."
"The way the e-commerce industry presents delivery needs to change. It is not a back-end function, it is a core part of the brand experience. By giving shoppers a genuine choice at checkout, retailers can turn missed delivery friction into certainty, lowering costs while improving the experience. Until this happens, parcel anxiety will remain a defining feature of UK commerce.”
1...Wickes has announced the launch of Wickes Connected Retail Media, a new retail media network that goes live with both onsite and offsite capabilities.
Pitched as a first of its kind proposition in the home improvement category, this is designed to help brands connect with UK home improvement customers wherever they are browsing, researching or shopping for products. It has been developed in partnership with Epsilon and is powered by its COREid identity graph.
Gary Kibble, Chief Marketing and Digital Officer at Wickes, says: “We're proud to launch Wickes Connected Retail Media in partnership with Epsilon, a major step forward for our business. This network makes it easier than ever for our customers to discover the brands and products that help them get their projects right.”
“From first time DIYers and design and installation customers to trade professionals managing multiple jobs each week, our shoppers have distinctive ways of researching, browsing and buying. We're excited to see the impact this will have for brands and customers alike, connecting them at the moments that matter most.”
2...Swiss sportswear brand On has taken the wraps off a new LightSpray factory in South Korea.
Following the opening of its first factory in Zurich last year, the second location near Busan adds another 32 fully automated robots, set to increase global LightSpray production capacity 30-fold in 2026.
In a LinkedIn post, On said: “What began as a four-year development journey, followed by the opening of its first dedicated facility, LightSpray is now ready to scale.”
“The factory launch coincides with the introduction of the LightSpray Cloudmonster 3 Hyper - the first shoe upper sprayed at the new factory and the the ultimate companion for long runs and tempo runs, featuring full length Helion HF hyper foam and “Sprayed in Korea” visible on the inside sole. The shoe debuts with a limited release at on.com and in On retail stores in North America on 5th March.”
300...Sainsbury's has announced plans to restructure its technology team and Argos delivery network, with the aim of creating more separation between the two businesses.
The move will involve the UK grocery giant cutting 300 head office jobs, most of which will be in technology and data, where it its “consolidating routine reporting tasks” and creating dedicated teams for Argos and Sainsbury's.
Local delivery hubs for Argos will be overhauled, with teams' shifts being changed so they are working more regular hours with less overtime. There will also be changes to its store leadership, creating four new regional roles for the retailer's convenience stores.
Sainsbury's is moving into to the third year of a restructuring initiative, which it announced in February 2024 with plans to target £1 billion in cost savings.
A spokesperson said: "As we gear up for year three of our next level plan, we're strengthening our focus behind both Sainsbury's and Argos. By maximising the power of our data and technology, we're freeing up our teams to concentrate on what matters most - delivering great food, brilliant service and fantastic value for our customers."
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading..
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Continue reading…
Follow us. Send us a message
Sign up with your email address to receive RTIH's daily newsletter straight to your inbox.
We respect your privacy and will not pass your email address on to third parties. However, we will occasionally send you promotional messages on behalf of our advertisers.
Thank you! You have been added to RTIH's daily newsletter mailing list
© Retail Technology Innovation Hub. All rights reserved. No part of this website, including text, graphics, logos, images, and software, may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior written permission of Retail Technology Innovation Hub.
COLUMBIA, S.C. (WIS) - A Food Lion manager in Richland County was recognized by the county sheriff Thursday after she stopped a 76-year-old woman from sending $5,000 in bitcoin to a scammer last month.
Amanda Greenlaw, assistant customer service manager at the Food Lion on Fairfield Road, was honored by Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott for her intervention. According to the sheriff, the elderly woman had received a call from someone claiming to be a lawyer, who told her that her son had been in a crash and needed bail money.
As the woman was about to deposit the money, Greenlaw stepped in and convinced her to call law enforcement instead. The victim and her family later confirmed her son was safe and had not been involved in an accident.
Greenlaw said she considers protecting elderly customers a personal mission and that this was not the first time she has intervened in a scam targeting an older victim.
“I value the senior citizens in the community, because they show us where we've come from,” Greenlaw said. “They are most vulnerable, they sit at home alone and have a phone and can answer emails and they are able to be scammed because they don't understand this. They don't know what Bitcoin is. They don't understand that once the money is gone, that's it.”
Sheriff Lott said a majority of scam callers operate from outside the country, but noted a growing problem with calls being made from within prison walls.
“Just because a criminal gets locked up, doesn't mean they stop being a criminal,” Lott said. “They have access to a phone; they're going to continue doing what they did on the outside. These scam calls are probably the number one thing that they do.”
Under the Communications Act of 1934, enforced by the FCC, state prisons and local detention centers are prohibited from jamming cell service to prevent the calls. The Department of Corrections has lobbied the FCC and Congress to change the law. Sheriff Lott said Richland County has joined that effort and has the technology to enforce a signal block if the law were changed.
Imposter scams — in which callers pose as family members, local officials, or attorneys to pressure victims into sending money — are becoming more common as artificial intelligence technology advances.
Feel more informed, prepared, and connected with WIS. For more free content like this, subscribe to our email newsletter, and download our apps. Have feedback that can help us improve? Click here.
Copyright 2026 WIS. All rights reserved.
Gear-obsessed editors choose every product we review. We may earn commission if you buy from a link. Why Trust Us?
A dusty artifact may be the key to solving one of true crime's oldest mysteries.
This story is a collaboration with Biography.com.
The legendary mystery of Jack the Ripper's true identity, an enigma that has endured for over a century, may come to an end thanks to the re-emergence of an old memento and a new theory proposed by a former police volunteer.
Are true crime obsessives headed down yet another tantalizing shrouded alley, only to find a dead end? Or will there finally be a proper face put to the notorious name that, once whispered in fear, is now shouted by endless tour guides in the Whitechapel district of London?
Perhaps the most famous cold case in history, the mystery of Jack the Ripper's real name has attracted more sleuths, professional and amateur, than any other case of the last 130-plus years. That the identity of the killer has remained unknown all this time has allowed him to slip into the realm of the morbidly fantastical, like the fictional occupants of penny dreadful novels such as Sweeney Todd and Springheel Jack.
Jack the Ripper has inspired films, novels, operas, and video games. He's even tousled with Batman on the illustrated page. After all, innumerable theories abound as to the identity of London's most infamous killer, and since we've long been left wondering who he was—or what he even looked like—we've let our minds imagine anyone, real or fake, wandering the foggy streets of Whitechapel.
But now, we may actually be close to answering the impossible question: Just who was Jack the Ripper?
What Are the New Clues That Reveal Jack the Ripper's Identity?
A rediscovered artifact that once belonged to Frederick Abberline, a detective who investigated Jack the Ripper back in 1888, is the first intriguing development.
As the New York Post reports, a custom-engraved walking stick that Abberline owned had long been held within the Police College in Bramshill, Hampshire, but it “...was feared lost when the institution was shut down in 2015.”
However, the cane reappeared when staff members at the College of Policing's headquarters Ryton were “searching through memorabilia.” The cane itself, in addition to being photographed and posted online, is now on display at the College of Policing “to highlight advancements in police technology to recruits.”
This walking stick is significant because Abberline had carved into the cane the only existing composite image ever made of Jack the Ripper, based on witness testimony. While the cane alone doesn't tell us who the infamous killer really was, its rediscovery does allow us to put a face to the Jack the Ripper.
A single cane from the 1800s may not close the case by itself, but a former police volunteer believes that combining the same kind of witness testimonies that led to that composite image with a close examination of medical records of the era could lead to a suspect long overlooked in the investigation.
As noted in The Independent, Sarah Bax Horton, the grandchild of an investigator who worked on the Jack the Ripper case, believes she has found the man responsible for the grisly Whitechapel murders.
Through examining medical records of the era, Horton says she has identified cigar maker Hyam Hyams as the real man behind Jack the Ripper. While Hyams' profession likely means he was proficient with a knife, the weapon used in the Jack the Ripper killings, Horton's theory relies more on the maladies that afflicted Hyams, both mental and physical, which align with what we know about Jack the Ripper.
“For the first time in history, Jack the Ripper can be identified as Hyam Hyams using distinctive physical characteristics,” Horton told The Telegraph regarding her theory. Reviewing medical notes for Hyams, Horton found that he had “an irregular gait and an inability to straighten his knees, with asymmetric foot-dragging.” Eyewitnesses in the Jack the Ripper investigation noted that the infamous killer also had an irregular gait.
Horton also notes that Hyams had a documented history of mental illness and violent outbursts. The Independent notes that Hyams “...repeatedly assaulted his wife, fearing she was cheating on him, and was eventually arrested after attacking her and his mother with a ‘chopper'.” Records of Hyams from across a number of infirmaries and asylums indicate that “his mental and physical decline coincided with the Ripper's killing period, escalating between his breaking his left arm in February 1888 and his permanent committal in September 1889.”
Of course, this triangulation of medical records and century-old eyewitness reports is unlikely to be enough to get most self-described “Ripperologists” to declare “case closed.” But one has to wonder: At this point, what would be enough?
Is it possible that there could ever be a satisfying conclusion to the world's most famous cold case? And why does it continue to captivate true crime enthusiasts all these decades later?
Was Jack the Ripper the First Serial Killer?
Jack the Ripper, a moniker adopted for the unidentified murderer, was not by any means the world's first “serial killer.” History, unsurprisingly, is littered with figures who would fit that bill depending on how specific a definition you choose.
Liu Pengli, the Prince of Jidong in the 2nd century B.C., slaughtered over 100 civilians. Dame Alice Kyteler, the “Witch of Kilkenny,” poisoned four of her husbands in 1300s Ireland. Joan of Arc's comrade-in-arms Gilles de Rais confessed to the killing of over 100 children. Countess Elizabeth Báthory's alleged killings of servant girls had already become the stuff of macabre folklore by the time the Whitechapel murders began. And there are countless figures in history who could be rightly categorized as serial killers, despite their victims being viewed as “property” or “subhuman” by the ruling governments of the time.
But while Jack the Ripper wasn't the first serial killer by any means, he was the first to become a media sensation, and the subject of fascination on a global scale. He may not have been the first serial killer by the literal definition, but in the manner in which we view the macabre topic, the exploits of the unknown man behind the moniker set the template for more than a century of morbid speculation and fascination.
Who Did Jack the Ripper Kill?
There are five “canonical” murders attributed to Jack the Ripper: those of Mary Ann Nichols, Annie Chapman, Elizabeth Stride, Catherine Eddowes, and Mary Jane Kelly. (Of course, as is the case even today in cold case investigations, there are other killings that are at times theorized as also being at the hands of the same murderer.) Biography.com notes that these murders all took place from August 7 to September 10, 1888, all within one mile of each other, and all targeting women of the same profession: sex workers.
As Biography.com points out, typically “the death or murder of a working girl was rarely reported in the press or discussed within polite society.” One might think that the “sadistic butchery” of the Jack the Ripper killings might have pushed their discussions further to the fringes of societal conversation, rather than to the center of public fascination. Instead, the newly affordable mass media of the time allowed the Jack the Ripper saga, including a series of mocking letters the killer reportedly sent to Scotland Yard, to serve as a macabre mirror to a society that had been otherwise priding itself on its progress and achievement.
What Was Jack the Ripper's London Like?
The 19th century, at least in the eyes of high society, saw the United Kingdom launch itself into modernity. The era of Queen Victoria saw England's streets becoming bathed in gaslight, the skyline filled with smokestacks from the Industrial Revolution. It was Isambard Kingdom Brunel connecting the nation through the Thames Tunnel, the Great Western Railway, and the SS Great Briton, amongst others. To stand in some parts of London by the latter decades of the 19th century must have felt as though one had stepped into the future, with wonders and marvels of modernity accessible to the many rather than simply the few. This was the side of London that Great Britain wanted the world to know about.
But of course, London is a big city. And the bright lights shone on some parts also cast shadows on all the rest. Such is the case in Whitechapel and its surrounding areas, where Jack the Ripper stalked his prey.
Here's how Biography.com sets the scene:
In Victorian Parliament's push for progress, poverty became a consequence. This industrial projects displaced a large number of people, such that even Conservative Party members were demanding social reform to repair the damage done. “Laissez-faire is an admirable doctrine,” Conservative Party leader Lord Salisbury said in an 1883 National Review article entitled ‘Labourers' and Artisans' Dwellings, “...but it must be applied on both sides.”
Much was made of the squalor in which the poor and working class were living while the wealthy in London lavished in the height of modernity. Parliament passed The Housing of the Working Classes Act 1885, which allowed them to condemn buildings they deemed slums. But this was merely a cosmetic action; the 1885 act did not allow for the government to create any new residences for the now-displaced people within them.
How Did Jack the Ripper Change the World?
The Jack the Ripper murders served as a wake-up call for Great Britain and the world, as the details of these grisly, monstrous crimes were contrasted against the supposedly advanced society that had inadvertently created the circumstances that had allowed them to fester.
The same forces and actions that allowed for the creation of the London Underground also created the seedy London underbelly that fed victims to craven creatures like Jack the Ripper. In much the same way the Manson murders in America 80 years later would be contrasted against the optimistic “Flower Power” movement of its era, Jack the Ripper forced the public to reconcile with the consequences of the steam-powered era of Isambard Kingdom Brunel, and wonder if this utopian vision wasn't terribly unstable as well.
The mystery of Jack the Ripper casts a long shadow over London to this day. Clearly, amateur sleuths still puzzle over the identity of the man who wielded a knife on the streets of London, and claimed the lives of innocent women struggling to get by. But the most significant consequence of the killings isn't a century of true crime speculations, nor the many books, films, and walking tours it inspired.
The reporting in the press on the Jack the Ripper killings led to a public outcry amongst the populace for social reforms to protect the most vulnerable. Reacting to the outcry, Parliament passed, amongst other acts, the Housing of the Working Classes Act 1890, which now gave them the ability to purchase land and build new housing for those displaced by the condemning of buildings deemed to be in poor condition.
In a bit of pithy commentary, playwright George Bernard Shaw declared in The Star that Jack the Ripper had, in his brutality, led to more social change than any academic or activist of the era:
Like Sarah Bax Horton taking her grandfather's cause into the 21st century, we culturally cannot let go of Jack the Ripper. You can chalk it up to a fascination with serial killers and true crime. You can attribute it to its inseparability from the “steampunk” vibes of 19th century London. And of course, it will be argued that the mystery of Jack the Ripper's real identity is what keeps us coming back to the sordid tale.
But our fixation may well mask a deeper question raised by the story of the Whitechapel murders, one on which it's far less fun to ruminate. Abberline's cane—the one with the supposed face of the killer—is on display at the College of Policing not in the hopes that someone might walk past and suddenly solve the case, but rather, to inspire a reflection on that dark past, and how far “advancements in police technology” have come.
Jack the Ripper, in absence of a biography of the killer to cling to, is instead a composite of the world he inhabited: the gaslights, the poverty, the easy prey, and the depravity that kept a country darkly fascinated. And as long as we must settle for the setting of the crimes in absence of facts about the killer, then staring at a carved face or corroborating medical records raises a question more lurid than, “Who was Jack the Ripper?”: that of “How did a supposedly great society allow such horrors to happen?”
And that's a scarier thought than any walking tour or comic book could conjure.
Michale Natale is a News Editor for the Hearst Enthusiast Group. As a writer and researcher, he has produced written and audio-visual content for more than fifteen years, spanning historical periods from the dawn of early man to the Golden Age of Hollywood. His stories for the Enthusiast Group have involved coordinating with organizations like the National Parks Service and the Secret Service, and travelling to notable historical sites and archaeological digs, from excavations of America' earliest colonies to the former homes of Edgar Allan Poe.
How a Skeleton's Necklace Rewrote the History of Christianity
New Evidence Emerges In Charles Lindbergh Baby Case
A Dead Man and a Code Even the FBI Can't Solve
The 25 Best STEM Toy Gifts for Boys
The Deadliest Accidental Collapse in U.S. History
The World Is Running Out of Sand
FBI's New D.B. Cooper File Reveals New Facts
The Pokémon Lego Sets Hit the Shelves for Pokémon Day
Was Jesus Really a Psychedelic Mushroom?
Inside the World's Most Deadly Cave Diving Disasters
Escape From the Rock
Why the CIA Turned a California Brothel Into a Lab
A Part of Hearst Digital Media
We may earn commission from links on this page, but we only recommend products we back.
©2026 Hearst Magazine Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Remnants of the Y-chromosomal lineage attributed to Genghis Khan were found in a set of medieval mausoleums attributed to his eldest son, Jochi.
Gear-obsessed editors choose every product we review. We may earn commission if you buy from a link. Why Trust Us?
Here's what you'll learn when you read this story:
This story is a collaboration with Biography.com.
There's a good chance that at some point in your life, you've come across the factoid that “one in every 200 people is descended from Genghis Khan.” It is a perennial internet favorite, but like many ‘facts' on the internet, it leaves a bevy of questions in its wake. Most particularly: How, exactly, do we know this?
The stat stems from a 2003 study that identified a Y-chromosomal lineage when surveying 16 different populations throughout Asia. “∼8% of the men in this region carry it,” the study said, “and it thus makes up ∼0.5% of the world total.” But the Genghis Khan connection came not from any direct DNA analysis—it was merely inferred after the researchers found that “the pattern of variation within the lineage suggested that it originated in Mongolia ∼1,000 years ago.”
In the decades since, no one has been able to directly tie this Y-chromosomal lineage to Genghis Khan through archeological evidence. That is, until now.
In a new study, a team of archeologists and geneticists from Japan, Kazakstan, and the U.S. suggests that they may have found the DNA of one of Genghis Khan's direct descendants in a pair of medieval mausoleums.
The collection of tombs were located in Ulitau region of Kazakhstan—an area once dominated by a division of the Mongol Empire known as the Golden Horde. This subdivision, which commanded the western wing of the empire, was overseen by the descendants of Khan's eldest son, Jochi, who lived from roughly 1182 to 1225 C.E.
Local tradition had long held that one of the mausoleums analyzed in this new study was, in fact, the final resting place of Jochi himself. While the analysts couldn't conclusively prove who was buried there, they were able to identify a common ancestor of all three of the men buried in the mausoleums. The trio all carried the haplogroup C3 Y-chromosome signature—the same signature that the aforementioned 2003 study found was in 0.5 percent of the population and attributed to Genghis Khan. This Y-chromosome lineage indicated that those buried in the mausoleums bore the genetic signature of the Mongols, as opposed to the genetic makeup of the Kipchak Turks native to the region.
There are reasons to question whether or not the mausoleum holds the remains of Jochi himself—radiocarbon dating indicates that the burials occurred after the time Jochi is believed to have died, for one, and it is known that Mongol tradition preferred secret graves to grand resting places like these. However, if one of these three men was Jochi, the presence of this shared Y-chromosome lineage could not only provide further confirmation that haplogroup C3 stems from Genghis Khan, but could clear up a centuries-old controversy regarding Genghis Khan's descendants.
Jochi was born to Börte Üjin, the first wife of Genghis Khan. However, shortly after the two wed, she was kidnapped by members of the Merkit tribe in an act of revenge against Khan. Khan ultimately rescued his wife, who (as stories have suggested) may have been forcibly married to, and subsequently sexually assaulted by, a member of the Merkit tribe—a story perpetuated in the oldest surviving work of Mongolic language literature, Secret History of the Mongols.
Jochi was born in the aftermath of this ordeal, and though Genghis Khan treated him without hesitation as his eldest son, the possibility that Jochi might have been fathered by a kidnapper created tension amidst other descendants—particularly younger brother Chagatai. Jochi was originally seen as the heir to Genghis Khan, but if he was illegitimate, Chagatai was presumably next in line. The infighting between the two siblings would ultimately result in both being excluded from the order of succession in favor of younger brother Ögedei.
So, if one of the men in Jochi's mausoleum really is the Mongol prince, not only have these researchers confirmed the Y-chromosome lineage of Genghis Khan discussed on the internet for decades, they've also resolved a parentage dispute that has raged over centuries.
Michale Natale is a News Editor for the Hearst Enthusiast Group. As a writer and researcher, he has produced written and audio-visual content for more than fifteen years, spanning historical periods from the dawn of early man to the Golden Age of Hollywood. His stories for the Enthusiast Group have involved coordinating with organizations like the National Parks Service and the Secret Service, and travelling to notable historical sites and archaeological digs, from excavations of America' earliest colonies to the former homes of Edgar Allan Poe.
Experts Found Human Remains With No Relatives
Geologists Found the World's Largest Gold Deposit
Archaeologists Found an Untouched Ancient Tomb
Lost Spanish Castle Revealed in Belgium
An Egyptian Tool Was 2,000 Years Ahead of Its Time
Two Explorers Found 3-Century-Old Pirate Treasure
Everything We Know About Stonehenge Might Be Wrong
Archaeologists Found a Tomb Filled With Gold
This Mosaic Shows a Lost Version of the Trojan War
A 5,500-Year-Old Burial Mystery Wraps with a Shock
Authorities Tracked Looters to a Cave of Artifacts
A Wild Wolf-Dog Hybrid Has Emerged in Greece
A Part of Hearst Digital Media
We may earn commission from links on this page, but we only recommend products we back.
©2026 Hearst Magazine Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Nature Communications
, Article number: (2026)
Cite this article
We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its
findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note
there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.
Gene fusion products involving protein kinases are known drivers in human cancers and actionable targets for personalized therapy, yet the structural and molecular determinants that control their function are largely unexplored. Here we show that a CCDC6-RET fusion protein, a driver and therapeutic target in lung and thyroid cancers, is a highly active dimeric kinase. Time-resolved mass spectrometry together with a robust biochemical and biophysical characterization reveal that CCDC6-RET functions as a dual ATP- and ADP-dependent kinase able to bind both nucleotides and to use them as phosphoryl donors. We also identify a crosstalk between the C-terminal and the activation segments controlling both the processing and the catalytic activity of the fusion protein. Furthermore, a 3D-structural assembly of a CCDC6-RET homodimer was generated combining single particle electron microscopy, small-angle X-ray scattering and in silico molecular dynamics simulations. Our structural model together with cross-linking mass spectrometry data demonstrated that CCDC6-RET in the inactive state forms a face-to-face dimer characterized by intermolecular-crosslinked activation segments. Upon nucleotide binding the catalytic domains swing apart and fast activation loop phosphorylation could be driven by a mechanism in cis. Our work uncovers the molecular and structural determinants that control the mechanism of CCDC6-RET autoactivation.
The mass spectrometry data have been deposited in the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD053907 (https://proteomecentral.proteomexchange.org/cgi/GetDataset?ID=PXD053907). The SAXS data were deposited in the small-angle scattering biological data bank (SASBDB) with ID: SASDVB5 (https://www.sasbdb.org/data/SASDSVB5). Protein model for the active configuration of CCDC6-RET has been deposited in ModelArchive with accession code ma-b7la0 (DOI: 10.5452/ma-b7la0) and ma-pcoh8 (DOI: 10.5452/ma-pcoh8). EM maps and other CCDC6-RET models used in this study are provided in the supplementary data files. Source data are provided with this paper.
Nowell PCaH, D. A. A minute chromosome in human chronic granulocytic leukemia. Science 142, 1497 (1960).
Google Scholar
de Klein, A. et al. A cellular oncogene is translocated to the Philadelphia chromosome in chronic myelocytic leukaemia. Nature 300, 765–767 (1982).
Google Scholar
Santoro, M., Moccia, M., Federico, G. & Carlomagno, F. RET gene fusions in malignancies of the thyroid and other tissues. Genes 11, 424 (2020).
Takahashi, M., Ritz, J. & Cooper, G. M. Activation of a novel human transforming gene, ret, by DNA rearrangement. Cell 42, 581–588 (1985).
Google Scholar
Takahashi, M. & Cooper, G. M. ret transforming gene encodes a fusion protein homologous to tyrosine kinases. Mol. Cell Biol. 7, 1378–1385 (1987).
Google Scholar
Takahashi, M. Structure and expression of the ret transforming gene. IARC Sci. Publ. 92, 189–197 (1988).
Iwamoto, T. et al. cDNA cloning of mouse ret proto-oncogene and its sequence similarity to the cadherin superfamily. Oncogene 8, 1087–1091 (1993).
Google Scholar
Pachnis, V., Mankoo, B. & Costantini, F. Expression of the c-ret proto-oncogene during mouse embryogenesis. Development 119, 1005–1017 (1993).
Google Scholar
Fusco, A. et al. A new oncogene in human thyroid papillary carcinomas and their lymph-nodal metastases. Nature 328, 170–172 (1987).
Google Scholar
Grieco, M. et al. PTC is a novel rearranged form of the ret proto-oncogene and is frequently detected in vivo in human thyroid papillary carcinomas. Cell 60, 557–563 (1990).
Google Scholar
Jhiang, S. M. et al. Detection of the PTC/retTPC oncogene in human thyroid cancers. Oncogene 7, 1331–1337 (1992).
Google Scholar
Nikiforov, Y. E. RET/PTC rearrangement in thyroid tumors. Endocr. Pathol. 13, 3–16 (2002).
Google Scholar
Ricarte-Filho, J. C. et al. Identification of kinase fusion oncogenes in post-Chornobyl radiation-induced thyroid cancers. J. Clin. Investig. 123, 4935–4944 (2013).
Google Scholar
Fagin, J. A. & Wells, S. A. Jr. Biologic and clinical perspectives on thyroid cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 375, 2307 (2016).
Google Scholar
Kohno, T. et al. KIF5B-RET fusions in lung adenocarcinoma. Nat. Med. 18, 375–377 (2012).
Google Scholar
Lipson, D. et al. Identification of new ALK and RET gene fusions from colorectal and lung cancer biopsies. Nat. Med. 18, 382–384 (2012).
Google Scholar
Wang, R. et al. RET fusions define a unique molecular and clinicopathologic subtype of non-small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 30, 4352–4359 (2012).
Google Scholar
Klempner, S. J. et al. Emergence of RET rearrangement co-existing with activated EGFR mutation in EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients who had progressed on first- or second-generation EGFR TKI. Lung Cancer 89, 357–359 (2015).
Google Scholar
Redaelli, S., Plaza-Menacho, I. & Mologni, L. Novel targeted therapeutics for MEN2. Endocr. Relat. Cancer 25, T53–T68 (2018).
Google Scholar
Shehata, M. A. et al. Structural and dynamic determinants for highly selective RET kinase inhibition reveal cryptic druggability. J. Adv. Res. 45, 87–100 (2023).
Google Scholar
McCoach, C. E. et al. Resistance mechanisms to targeted therapies in ROS1(+) and ALK(+) non-small cell lung cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 24, 3334–3347 (2018).
Google Scholar
Piotrowska, Z. et al. Landscape of acquired resistance to Osimertinib in EGFR-mutant NSCLC and clinical validation of combined EGFR and RET inhibition with Osimertinib and BLU-667 for acquired RET fusion. Cancer Discov. 8, 1529–1539 (2018).
Google Scholar
Lin, J. J. et al. Mechanisms of resistance to selective RET tyrosine kinase inhibitors in RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann. Oncol. 31, 1725–1733 (2020).
Google Scholar
Solomon, B. J. et al. RET solvent front mutations mediate acquired resistance to selective RET inhibition in RET-driven malignancies. J. Thorac. Oncol. 15, 541–549 (2020).
Google Scholar
Tan, L. & Solomon, B. J. Defining resistance mechanisms to selective RET tyrosine kinase inhibitors in RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann. Oncol. 31, 1599–1600 (2020).
Google Scholar
Terzyan, S. S. et al. Structural basis of resistance of mutant RET protein-tyrosine kinase to its inhibitors nintedanib and vandetanib. J. Biol. Chem. 294, 10428–10437 (2019).
Google Scholar
Knowles, P. P. et al. Structure and chemical inhibition of the RET tyrosine kinase domain. J. Biol. Chem. 281, 33577–33587 (2006).
Google Scholar
Plaza-Menacho, I. et al. RET functions as a dual-specificity kinase that requires allosteric inputs from juxtamembrane elements. Cell Rep. 17, 3319–3332 (2016).
Google Scholar
Plaza-Menacho, I. et al. Oncogenic RET kinase domain mutations perturb the autophosphorylation trajectory by enhancing substrate presentation in trans. Mol. Cell 53, 738–751 (2014).
Google Scholar
Mologni, L., Redaelli, S., Morandi, A., Plaza-Menacho, I. & Gambacorti-Passerini, C. Ponatinib is a potent inhibitor of wild-type and drug-resistant gatekeeper mutant RET kinase. Mol. Cell Endocrinol. 377, 1–6 (2013).
Google Scholar
Hubbard, S. R., Wei, L., Hendrickson, W. A. & Ellis, L. WA. Crystal structure of the tyrosine kinase domain of the human insulin receptor. Nature 372, 746–754 (1994).
Google Scholar
Simm, D., Hatje, K. & Kollmar, M. Waggawagga: comparative visualization of coiled-coil predictions and detection of stable single alpha-helices (SAH domains). Bioinformatics 31, 767–769 (2015).
Google Scholar
Wood, C. W. & Woolfson, D. N. CCBuilder 2.0: powerful and accessible coiled-coil modeling. Protein Sci. 27, 103–111 (2018).
Google Scholar
Bhate, M. P., Molnar, K. S., Goulian, M. & DeGrado, W. F. Signal transduction in histidine kinases: insights from new structures. Structure 23, 981–994 (2015).
Google Scholar
Kimanius, D., Dong, L., Sharov, G., Nakane, T. & Scheres, S. H. W. New tools for automated cryo-EM single-particle analysis in RELION-4.0. Biochem. J. 478, 4169–4185 (2021).
Google Scholar
Punjani, A., Rubinstein, J. L., Fleet, D. J. & Brubaker, M. A. cryoSPARC: algorithms for rapid unsupervised cryo-EM structure determination. Nat. Methods 14, 290–296 (2017).
Google Scholar
Dubey, B. N. et al. Hybrid histidine kinase activation by cyclic di-GMP-mediated domain liberation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 117, 1000–1008 (2020).
Google Scholar
Dubey, B. N. et al. Cyclic di-GMP mediates a histidine kinase/phosphatase switch by noncovalent domain cross-linking. Sci. Adv. 2, e1600823 (2016).
Google Scholar
Iacobucci, C. et al. A cross-linking/mass spectrometry workflow based on MS-cleavable cross-linkers and the MeroX software for studying protein structures and protein-protein interactions. Nat. Protoc. 13, 2864–2889 (2018).
Google Scholar
Laskowski, R. A., Jablonska, J., Pravda, L., Varekova, R. S. & Thornton, J. M. PDBsum: Structural summaries of PDB entries. Protein Sci. 27, 129–134 (2018).
Google Scholar
Reinhardt, R. et al. PKD autoinhibition in trans regulates activation loop autophosphorylation in cis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 120, e2212909120 (2023).
Google Scholar
Levina, A., Fleming, K. D., Burke, J. E. & Leonard, T. A. Activation of the essential kinase PDK1 by phosphoinositide-driven trans-autophosphorylation. Nat. Commun. 13, 1874 (2022).
Google Scholar
Reinhardt, R. & Leonard, T. A. A critical evaluation of protein kinase regulation by activation loop autophosphorylation. Elife 12, e88210 (2023).
Guixe, V. & Merino, F. The ADP-dependent sugar kinase family: kinetic and evolutionary aspects. IUBMB Life 61, 753–761 (2009).
Google Scholar
Ito, S. et al. Structural basis for the ADP-specificity of a novel glucokinase from a hyperthermophilic archaeon. Structure 9, 205–214 (2001).
Google Scholar
Richter, J. P., Goroncy, A. K., Ronimus, R. S. & Sutherland-Smith, A. J. The structural and functional characterization of mammalian ADP-dependent glucokinase. J. Biol. Chem. 291, 3694–3704 (2016).
Google Scholar
Gout, E., Rebeille, F., Douce, R. & Bligny, R. Interplay of Mg2+, ADP, and ATP in the cytosol and mitochondria: unravelling the role of Mg2+ in cell respiration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111, E4560–E4567 (2014).
Google Scholar
Tantama, M., Martinez-Francois, J. R., Mongeon, R. & Yellen, G. Imaging energy status in live cells with a fluorescent biosensor of the intracellular ATP-to-ADP ratio. Nat. Commun. 4, 2550 (2013).
Google Scholar
Maldonado, E. N. & Lemasters, J. J. ATP/ADP ratio, the missed connection between mitochondria and the Warburg effect. Mitochondrion 19, 78–84 (2014).
Google Scholar
Coccimiglio, I. F. & Clarke, D. C. ADP is the dominant controller of AMP-activated protein kinase activity dynamics in skeletal muscle during exercise. PLoS Comput. Biol. 16, e1008079 (2020).
Google Scholar
Sampson, J., Richards, M. W., Choi, J., Fry, A. M. & Bayliss, R. Phase-separated foci of EML4-ALK facilitate signalling and depend upon an active kinase conformation. EMBO Rep. 22, e53693 (2021).
Google Scholar
Juyoux, P., von Velsen, J., Pellegrini, E. & Bowler, M. W. Dual-specificity mitogen-activated protein kinase kinases can use ADP to phosphorylate MAP kinases in vitro. J. Biol. Chem. 301, 110578 (2025).
Google Scholar
Borar, P. et al. Dual-specific autophosphorylation of kinase IKK2 enables phosphorylation of substrate IkappaBalpha through a phosphoenzyme intermediate. Elife 13, RP98009 (2025).
Knight, J. D. et al. A novel whole-cell lysate kinase assay identifies substrates of the p38 MAPK in differentiating myoblasts. Skelet. Muscle 2, 5 (2012).
Google Scholar
Bork, P., Sander, C. & Valencia, A. Convergent evolution of similar enzymatic function on different protein folds: the hexokinase, ribokinase, and galactokinase families of sugar kinases. Protein Sci. 2, 31–40 (1993).
Google Scholar
Li, M. H. et al. Crystal structure of brain pyridoxal kinase, a novel member of the ribokinase superfamily. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 46385–46390 (2002).
Google Scholar
Plaza-Menacho, I., Mologni, L. & McDonald, N. Q. Mechanisms of RET signaling in cancer: current and future implications for targeted therapy. Cell Signal. 26, 1743–1752 (2014).
Google Scholar
Cuesta-Hernandez, H. N. et al. An allosteric switch between the activation loop and a c-terminal palindromic phospho-motif controls c-Src function. Nat. Commun. 14, 6548 (2023).
Hughes, C. S. et al. Single-pot, solid-phase-enhanced sample preparation for proteomics experiments. Nat. Protoc. 14, 68–85 (2019).
Combe, C. W., Graham, M., Kolbowski, L., Fischer, L. & Rappsilber, J. xiVIEW: Visualisation of Crosslinking Mass Spectrometry Data. J. Mol. Biol. 436, 168656 (2024).
Cowieson, N. P. et al. Beamline B21: high-throughput small-angle X-ray scattering at Diamond Light Source. J. Synchrotron. Radiat. 27, 1438–1446 (2020).
Petoukhov, M. V. et al. New developments in the ATSAS program package for small-angle scattering data analysis. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 45, 342–350 (2012).
Schneidman-Duhovny, D., Hammel, M., Tainer, J. A. & Sali, A. FoXS, FoXSDock and MultiFoXS: Single-state and multi-state structural modeling of proteins and their complexes based on SAXS profiles. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W424–429 (2016).
Lopez-Blanco, J. R., Canosa-Valls, A. J., Li, Y. & Chacon, P. RCD+: Fast loop modeling server. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, W395–400 (2016).
Abramson, J. et al. Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions with AlphaFold 3. Nature 630, 493–500 (2024).
Waterhouse, A. et al. SWISS-MODEL: homology modelling of protein structures and complexes. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, W296–W303 (2018).
Maier, J. A. et al. ff14SB: Improving the Accuracy of Protein Side Chain and Backbone Parameters from ff99SB. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 3696–3713 (2015).
Raguette L. E., et al. phosaa14SB and phosaa19SB: Updated Amber Force Field Parameters for Phosphorylated Amino Acids. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 20, 7199–7209 (2024).
Mills, A. & Gago, F. Atomistic insight into sequence-directed DNA bending and minicircle formation propensity in the absence and presence of phased A-tracts. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 34, 253–265 (2020).
Download references
We are grateful to the Genomics and Spectroscopy and NMR Units (CNIO) for technical assistance, to Marta San Román and Mariano Barbacid from the Experimental Oncology Group (CNIO) for helping with the radioactive experiments, and to former members of the Protein Phosphorylation and Cancer Group for their contribution at the very early stages of the project (Pablo Soriano, Nicolás Cuesta y Julio Martínez-Torres). We thank Nabil Djouder for helpful comments and advice on the manuscript and Michael Tress for helping with the.json files. The authors would like to thank Diamond Light Source for beamtime (beamline B21, proposal mx30297) and their staff for assistance during data collection. We thank the Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Oncológicas (CNIO), which is supported by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III and recognized as a “Severo Ochoa” Centre of Excellence (ref. CEX2019-000891-S, awarded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/5 01100011033) for core funding and supporting this study. This work was further supported by projects from the Agencia Estatal de Investigación (AEI), Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (MCIN): BFU2017-86710-R (MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and ERDF “A way of making Europe”), PID2020-117580RB-I00 (MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033), RYC-2016-1938 (MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and ESF “Investing in your future”), CNS2023-145340 “Ayudas para Incentivar la Consolidación Investigadora” (MCIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and the European Union, NextGenerationEU/PRTR) and a FP7-PEOPLE-2013-COFUND-Marie-Curie Action: “Co-funding of regional, National and International Programmes” International grant (number 608765) to I.P-M. Work at the University of Alcalá was supported by grant PID2022-136307OB-C22/ AEI/10.13039/501100011033.
Javier Muñoz
Present address: Biobizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain
Protein Phosphorylation and Cancer Group, Structural Biology Programme, Spanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain
Ana Martín-Hurtado, Julia Contreras & Iván Plaza-Menacho
Proteomics Unit, Spanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain
Jana Sánchez-Wandelmer, Eduardo Zarzuela, Fernando García, Javier Muñoz & Marta Isasa
Electron Microscopy Unit, Spanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain
Johanne Le Coq & Jasminka Boskovic
Protein Crystallography Unit, Spanish National Cancer Research Center (CNIO), Madrid, Spain
Inés G. Muñoz
Biomedical Sciences Department, University of Alcalá (UAH), Madrid, Spain
Federico Gago
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Conception of the study, experimental design, supervision of the study, funding acquisition and preparation of first draft (I.P.-M.), manuscript writing, data analysis and figures preparation (I.P.-M., A.M.-H.), mass spectrometry including data analysis (J.S.-W., J.M., E.Z, F. García and M.I.), EM studies and data analysis (J.B. and J.LC.), SAXS studies including data analysis and figure preparation (I.G.M.), molecular dynamics simulations studies and data analysis (F. Gago), experimental work and data acquisition (A.M.-H., J.C., I.P.-M.).
Correspondence to
Iván Plaza-Menacho.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Nature Communications thanks Xiabin Chen and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. A peer review file is available.
Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
Martín-Hurtado, A., Contreras, J., Sánchez-Wandelmer, J. et al. The oncogenic CCDC6-RET fusion protein is a dual ATP- and ADP-dependent kinase.
Nat Commun (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-69833-y
Download citation
Received: 03 July 2024
Accepted: 11 February 2026
Published: 06 March 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-69833-y
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Advertisement
Nature Communications
(Nat Commun)
ISSN 2041-1723 (online)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited
Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.
Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Rachel Fieldhouse is a reporter for Nature in Sydney, Australia.
Search author on:
PubMed
Google Scholar
A medical team at Xijing Hospital of the Air Force Medical University in Xi'an, China, surgically connected a man with liver failure to an external, genetically modified pig liver. Credit: Xinhua via Alamy
A 56-year-old man with liver failure has become the first living person to be surgically connected to a genetically modified pig liver, say the team that conducted the surgery. The pig organ filtered the man's blood for a few days while he waited for a human liver transplant, they say.
The man has since received a human liver and is recovering well, says Lin Wang, one of the surgeons who led the procedure in January at Xijing Hospital of the Air Force Medical University in Xi'an, China. Wang says his team plans to submit the results to a peer-reviewed journal.
Proponents of transplanting genetically modified animal organs into people, a procedure called xenotransplantation, hope that the method could reduce the number of people who die while waiting for a human organ. At least a dozen people in the United States and China have received pig organs, including hearts, kidneys, livers and a thymus – and clinical trials are under way in both nations. But, organ transplants are high-risk surgeries and recipients must take immunosuppressants for the rest of their lives. In the latest surgery, the recipient was connected to a pig liver outside their body — a procedure called extracorporeal perfusion.
The procedure is a bridging therapy that allows a person's organs to recover, and it can be lifesaving for people who are too sick to wait for a human donor organ without intervention, says Wayne Hawthorne, a surgeon and transplant researcher at the University of Sydney in Australia.
Extracorporeal perfusion using pig organs has been performed since the 1990s, but the development of genetically modified pig organs that are more compatible with people reduces the risk of organ rejection. A US team have connected at least four clinically dead people to external, genetically modified pig livers1. That surgeons in China have been able to do this in a living person is “a remarkable achievement,” adds Hawthorne.
Muhammad Mohiuddin, a clinician-researcher at the University of Maryland School of Medicine in Baltimore, who led the first pig-heart transplant into a living person in 2022, agrees that the technology could be lifesaving.
Hawthorne and Mohiuddin say they are eager to know more details about the surgery in China, including the amount of immune-suppressing therapy that was used, how the man's health changed over time and how long could someone be connected to the external liver. Results of liver-function tests before, during and after the surgery will also be needed if the team publishes its findings, Hawthorne adds. “This is all the basics for a liver transplant paper.”
The recipient in China had chronic hepatitis B infection, a serious liver illness, and damage caused by alcohol, which led to a sudden deterioration in his liver function, says Wang. He had been hospitalized in Shanghai, China, for a month before Wang's team treated him. Without a donor organ available, the surgeons decided — with consent from the man and his family — to test whether a pig liver could take over the functions of his failing liver.
The pig liver contained six genetic modifications, says Wang, and was supplied by the company ClonOrgan Biotechnology in Chengdu, China. The six genetic modifications included three deactivated pig genes and introduced three genes that produce human proteins, to reduce the risk of the recipient rejecting the organ.
The surgeons stitched tubes to a vein in the man's leg, connecting him to a perfusion device containing the pig liver. His blood was redirected through the pig liver to remove harmful waste products that build up owing to liver failure. The physicians said that there were no signs that the organ was being rejected, and that the man's own liver function began to improve.
or
doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-026-00736-0
Shaked, A. et al. Nature Med. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-04196-3 (2026).
Article
Google Scholar
Download references
Reprints and permissions
First pig liver transplanted into a person lasts for 10 days
Pig-organ transplants: what three human recipients have taught scientists
First pig kidney transplant in a person: what it means for the future
Clinical trials for pig-to-human organ transplants inch closer
First pig kidneys transplanted into people: what scientists think
Genome modelling and design across all domains of life with Evo 2
Article 04 MAR 26
Cell-free chromatin state tracing reveals disease origin and therapy responses
Article 04 MAR 26
Exapted CRISPR–Cas12f homologues drive RNA-guided transcription
Article 04 MAR 26
The missing pieces of menopause science
Outlook 06 MAR 26
Uncharted: Understanding women's health across the body
Outlook 06 MAR 26
Do obesity drugs treat addiction? Huge study hints at their promise
News 05 MAR 26
A metabolic alarmin from keratinocytes potentiates systemic humoral immunity
Article 04 MAR 26
Skin cells boost distant antibody responses
News & Views 04 MAR 26
Lipid metabolism drives dietary effects on T cell ferroptosis and immunity
Article 04 MAR 26
Shenzhen, China
The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen - School of Science and Engineering
Molecular Mechanisms and Neural Circuits of Fear Memory, Maternal and Social Behavior. A recent PhD in molecular biology / neuroscience.
Piscataway, New Jersey
Rutgers University Shumyatsky lab
Job Title: Reporter, Nature Location: Washington DC or New York (Hybrid Working Model) Application Deadline: March 27, 2026 About Springer Nature...
New York City, New York (US)
Springer Nature Ltd
Houston, Texas (US)
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Eleven New Professor-Level Research Positions Opened for Female Candidates at Tohoku University
Japan (JP)
Tohoku University
First pig liver transplanted into a person lasts for 10 days
Pig-organ transplants: what three human recipients have taught scientists
First pig kidney transplant in a person: what it means for the future
Clinical trials for pig-to-human organ transplants inch closer
First pig kidneys transplanted into people: what scientists think
An essential round-up of science news, opinion and analysis, delivered to your inbox every weekday.
Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.
Nature
(Nature)
ISSN 1476-4687 (online)
ISSN 0028-0836 (print)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited
The UniverseFridays
March 6, 2026
6 min read
It's time to speak out against the unchecked growth of satellite mega constellations
Satellites are wonders of modern technology that have improved all of our lives. But having more than a million of them in orbit could destroy our view of the heavens and seriously damage our planet
By Phil Plait edited by Lee Billings
Light trails from satellites in low-Earth orbit fill the sky in this composite long-exposure photograph, which was captured over a 30-minute period.
Alan Dyer/VWPics/Alamy Stock Photo
Stay connected to The Universe: Get email alerts for this weekly column by Phil Plait
I remember the first time I saw a satellite. I was a teenager, standing in my mildly light-polluted suburban yard and doing my usual stargazing. The satellite was a faint “star” moving slowly and smoothly across the sky, and as I watched it, I felt a mix of awe and wonder that such a thing could be seen—and that humans could put an object into orbit at all.
That was a lifetime ago, and I now look back on that evening with more discomfiture than nostalgia; my adolescent naivete feels almost embarrassing.
That's because, these days, seeing one of those celestial travelers fills me with dread. We are firmly in the era of the satellite constellation—groups of dozens of similar satellites—and are currently entering the era of the mega constellation, wherein groups of thousands of satellites swarm the skies. The clusters of satellites started small, but, like a viral outbreak, they grew almost without us noticing—and now we're dealing with a pandemic.
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
I wrote about this problem for Scientific American in May 2023. At the time, there were 7,500 active satellites orbiting Earth; more than half of them were SpaceX Starlink satellites that provided Internet service. In a little under three years, the number of just Starlink satellites in orbit has reached nearly 10,000. Today there are literally more Starlink satellites up there than the sum total of all other operational satellites.
This ratio will almost certainly get more skewed toward Starlink, too; back in 2019, when the first Starlink satellites were launched, SpaceX filed with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for up to 30,000 additional satellites.
Does that sound bad? Well, there may come a day, all too soon, when we're nostalgic for such a small a number of satellites cluttering the sky. On January 30, 2026, SpaceX filed for permission to launch as many as one million more satellites.
Yes, one million.
SpaceX's plan is for this sprawling mega constellation to become a distributed network operating as an orbital data center, similar to ground-based data centers that provide the information processing backbone of the Internet. In this case, instead of having equipment capable of all that processing power stored in massive warehouses, each satellite in orbit would do a small part of the number crunching and then beam the final results back to the ground.
In principle, such plans could ease the insatiable power demands and environmental effects of ground-based centers. In 2023 data centers in just the U.S. consumed a staggering 176 million megawatt-hours of energy—a little more than 4 percent of the nation's annual electricity usage and enough to power 16 million homes for a year. Many of these centers are powered by fossil fuels that add greenhouse gases into the atmosphere that worsen global warming. These centers also need to be cooled, and they typically consume vast amounts of water to do so. And as the use of computationally-intensive artificial intelligence soars, so, too, will the appetite for ever more power—and the potential for ever greater environmental harm.
Exporting most of that “compute” to orbit, SpaceX claims, is how to break this vicious cycle. And there is some truth to that: the satellites will be solar powered, easing the electricity demand on Earth. They also won't need water to cool their hot chips but will instead rely on large radiators to vent heat—a slower, less efficient method but the best one available in the near-vacuum of space. Currently in-use Starlink satellites already cool themselves this way, and the heat load for a satellite used to process data would be roughly the same as one used to provide Internet, so this isn't the showstopper problem many people assume it to be.
So, if you don't look too deep, large-scale orbital data centers might make sense. Scratching the surface of this idea, however, shows just how colossally terrible it is.
First, those satellites need to get to space. As astrophysicist Jonathan McDowell, my friend and colleague, points out, SpaceX claims that its Starship rocket can (once it passes testing) take 150 metric tons to low-Earth orbit, but there are good reasons to think the real operational capacity will prove be more like 100 metric tons. Assuming that low-Earth orbit is in fact where all the satellites will go (and many will undoubtedly need to fly higher), and that they each are two metric tons, that means Starship can launch around 50 satellites at a time—so creating this mega constellation even under very optimistic assumptions would require some 20,000 Starship launches.
It gets worse: these satellites will fail after a few years and will need to be replaced. In the end, upkeep for this notional million-satellite mega constellation could take on the order of 10 Starship launches per day, forever.
The environmental effect of all this wouldn't be trivial. A single Starship launch emits 76,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, for example—leaving aside issues of noise pollution and potential damage to nearby habitats. Twenty thousand launches would have an immense effect, including more damage to our critical ozone layer. The fiery atmospheric reentries of satellites would be a source of pollution, too, dumping significant amounts of vaporized metal and plastic into our planet's fragile upper atmosphere. At least one Starlink satellite is already burning up like this every day, based on when these satellites started entering orbit and their planned replacement cycles—and orbital data centers could make this reentry rate skyrocket.
As if this weren't enough, a proliferation of mega constellations also carries risks for the orbital environment itself. The volume of satellites already over our head is huge, but the numbers of proposed satellites are so vast that space traffic management to avoid collisions would become an even more massive task. Even a single collision in orbit can become catastrophic; these satellites are moving at speeds many times faster than a rifle bullet, and a direct hit from one creates a cloud of shrapnel. That debris spreads, hitting other satellites and creating even more debris, resulting in a violent cascade called the Kessler syndrome. Triggering this syndrome is already a real concern, despite orbital decay naturally “cleaning” low-Earth orbit over time. Increasing the numbers of satellites by several thousandfold could make this threat apocalyptically worse.
And as an astronomer, I can't help but worry over the effect on my beloved field. A study published last December in Nature showed that if there were roughly half a million satellites in orbit, at least one would contaminate essentially every observation taken by the Hubble Space Telescope. Ground-based telescopes would also be severely affected; they already are now! Vaporized debris from reentries will also add to sky glow, making it more difficult to see faint cosmic objects. Even simple stargazing from your backyard would be affected. In a very real sense, by launching so many satellites, we risk losing the sky.
Keep in mind that SpaceX is not the only one crowding the sky. China has filed to launch 200,000 satellites for its own network. Other countries and companies will no doubt follow suit; Amazon and Blue Origin already plan on launching thousands of satellites each as well. Even more concerning is a new company, called Reflect Orbital, that wants to launch thousands of giant space mirrors into orbit to provide “sunlight on demand” anywhere on Earth. The beams would be far brighter than the full moon and, even if carefully pointed, would scatter in the atmosphere to be very bright off-beam, disrupting wildlife and effectively destroying the sky's remaining natural beauty by erasing the stars from our sight. These mirrors are a truly terrible idea.
That's the common theme here, in fact. Even ignoring the deeply disturbing environmental and light pollution from all these launches and reentries, there is another effect. Our night sky—and it is ours—is a natural wonder, a cosmic park we need to preserve, not exploit with a laissez-faire attitude. This careless exploitation of the heavens above is a real danger to us all.
If all this appalls you as much as it does me, then make your voice heard. The FCC is taking public comments on Reflect Orbital's filing until March 9, 2026, and on SpaceX's megaconstellation until March 6 (the day this article is published). The American Astronomical Society has more information and links, as well as instructions on how to submit a comment. I did!
Phil Plait is a professional astronomer and science communicator in Virginia. His column for Scientific American, The Universe, covers all things space. He writes the Bad Astronomy Newsletter. Follow him online.
If you enjoyed this article, I'd like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I've been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you'll support us in that mission.
Thank you,
David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American
Subscribe to Scientific American to learn and share the most exciting discoveries, innovations and ideas shaping our world today.
Scientific American is part of Springer Nature, which owns or has commercial relations with thousands of scientific publications (many of them can be found at www.springernature.com/us). Scientific American maintains a strict policy of editorial independence in reporting developments in science to our readers.
© 2025 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, A DIVISION OF SPRINGER NATURE AMERICA, INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
March 6, 2026
2 min read
Michael Pollan explains why AI will never replicate human consciousness
Michael Pollan tells Scientific American why the science of consciousness may ultimately be too subject to our own conscious minds to crack
By Claire Cameron edited by Jeanna Bryner
WhataWin via Getty Images
Michael Pollan sat down with Scientific American's Brianne Kane to discuss his new book, A World Appears: A Journey into Consciousness. This story is adapted from that discussion. To hear more about Pollan's thoughts on consciousness and his new book, listen to the interview in this Science Quickly podcast.
Join Our Community of Science Lovers!
Of all of the top contenders for the hardest problem in science, perhaps the most important to our lived experience is this: What, exactly, is consciousness?
Humans have a highly complex brain and, for some of us at least, even more complex emotions. We can think and feel; we are aware of ourselves. We can create new ideas. But where this awareness comes from is a mystery. And why we feel anything at all about anything is clouded with subjectivity.
“The only tool we have with which to explore consciousness is consciousness itself,” says Michael Pollan, a celebrated science journalist and author of the new book A World Appears: A Journey into Consciousness. This conundrum—and how to potentially solve it—guides Pollan's examination of consciousness, highlighting both the science and the philosophical dilemma it poses.
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
In this episode of Science Quickly, journalist Michael Pollan joins Scientific American's Bri Kane to unpack why consciousness is so hard to define in a discussion that explores what brain science, artificial intelligence experiments and even psychedelics might reveal about how awareness works.
How we know we are conscious is likely impossible to fully explain using conventional neuroscience research methods such as brain scans, Pollan says. “One of the speculations in the book is that it may take a scientific revolution to really help us,” he says.
There are some 29 competing theories of consciousness. We can trace signs of awareness and emotion in the brain. We can feel certain that we, as thinking individuals, are conscious and can infer that other humans are conscious, too. But, Pollan argues, that's about it.
One of the major questions Pollan tackles in the book is whether we could ever recognize consciousness in another species or entity. Detecting such a phenomenon in an organism or entity that looks and behaves nothing like a human will be “really hard,” he says. An artificial intelligence, for example, might express consciousness in very different ways than humans do, he adds.
“I don't think it'll be anything like ours,” he says. “Because ours is very much the product of our bodies and our of our human vulnerability.” One researcher he cites in the book is Mark Solms, whose lab is attempting to develop a conscious AI by making it feel uncertainty and conflicting needs.
“We may have to become kind of plurals of consciousness and stipulate that there are going to be many different kinds,” Pollan says.
Pollan spoke to Scientific American's associate books editor Brianne Kane. You can listen to the podcast interview here.
Claire Cameron is breaking news chief at Scientific American. Originally from Scotland, she moved to New York City in 2012. Her work has appeared in National Geographic, Slate, Inc. Magazine, Nautilus, Semafor, and elsewhere.
If you enjoyed this article, I'd like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.
I've been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.
If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.
In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.
There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you'll support us in that mission.
Thank you,
David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American
Subscribe to Scientific American to learn and share the most exciting discoveries, innovations and ideas shaping our world today.
Scientific American is part of Springer Nature, which owns or has commercial relations with thousands of scientific publications (many of them can be found at www.springernature.com/us). Scientific American maintains a strict policy of editorial independence in reporting developments in science to our readers.
© 2025 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN, A DIVISION OF SPRINGER NATURE AMERICA, INC.ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Nature Communications
volume 17, Article number: 1655 (2026)
Cite this article
Metabolic and epigenetic rewiring are hallmarks of cancer, with increasing evidence suggesting crosstalk between these processes. While previous studies have hinted at the role of metabolic enzymes in the nucleus, the extent and functional relevance of their nuclear localization remain unclear. In this study, we present a comprehensive chromatome proteomic analysis across cancer lineages and healthy samples, revealing that metabolic enzyme moonlighting on chromatin is widespread across various tissues and metabolic pathways. We show that the abundance of metabolic enzymes on chromatin is tissue-specific, with oxidative phosphorylation proteins notably depleted in lung cancer, suggesting a link between nuclear metabolism and cell identity. Further, we explore the dynamic chromatin association of one-carbon folate enzymes, demonstrating their involvement in DNA damage and repair processes. Finally, we asked whether restricting metabolic enzymes to specific subcellular compartments rewires the transcriptome, thereby decoupling the observed transcriptional changes from mere metabolite diffusion. Our findings propose and validate novel non-canonical nuclear roles for several metabolic enzymes, providing new insights into the functional relationship between metabolism and chromatin regulation. This study underscores the hypothesis that the nucleus is populated by metabolic enzymes, offering new avenues for understanding how nuclear metabolism impacts chromatin function and cancer progression.
Broad changes in the epigenetic and metabolic landscapes are both recognized hallmarks of cancer1,2,3. However, the interplay between these processes has remained elusive. Cancer transformation involves complex metabolic rewiring, which is essential for sustaining tumor growth and supporting metastasis. Traditionally, the connection between metabolism and epigenetics is mediated by metabolic substrates, such as acetyl-CoA, S-adenosylmethionine (SAM), or adenosine triphosphate (ATP), that facilitate epigenetic modifications4,5,6,7. These modifications, in turn, can induce transcriptional changes in specific metabolic enzymes, driving further metabolic rewiring. Classic examples, such as the c-Myc oncogene-BRD4 axis driving the transcription of folate metabolism enzymes8, or mutations in the enzymes Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 and 2 (IDH1 and IDH2) leading to aberrant genome-wide DNA and histone hypermethylation9, illustrate the strong, albeit indirect, connection between epigenetics and metabolism. Recent evidence, however, suggests a more direct interaction, particularly through the nuclear and chromatin translocation of metabolic enzymes.
Metabolic enzymes traditionally associated with cytoplasmic or organelle-specific metabolic reactions have also been shown to carry out distinct functions within the nucleus, phenomena often referred to as nuclear moonlighting functions10,11,12,13. These unexpected nuclear involvements often relate to chromatin dynamics and can occur independently of the enzyme's catalytic properties. For example, Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) nuclear localization is required to transcriptionally control apoptosis-related genes14, but also to facilitate the DNA damage repair by stabilizing RAD5115 and promoting the nuclear localization of Nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase (NAMPT)16. Nuclear fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase 1 (FBP1) interacts with the Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2) to regulate levels of H3K27me317. Moreover, the nuclear localization of Pyruvate Kinase M2 (PKM2) is required for the phosphorylation of Histone H3 (T11), which consequently regulates histone acetylation10,11. In other cases, the canonical enzymatic activity of certain enzymes is essential for their nuclear function. For instance, Acyl-CoA synthetase short chain family member 2 (ACCS2) and ATP citrate lyase (ACLY) can both generate acetyl-CoA in the nucleus, which directly influences histone acetylation18,19,20,21,22,23. In a separate mechanism, the synthesis of nuclear ATP by the enzyme Nudix hydrolase 5 (NUDIX5) in breast cancer cells is required for estrogen-induced chromatin remodeling24. Additionally, the nuclear localization of Methylenetetrahydrofolate Dehydrogenase, Cyclohydrolase and Formyltetrahydrofolate Synthetase 1 (MTHFD1), a predominantly cytoplasmic folate metabolic enzyme, boosts the cancer-associated transcriptional landscape promoted by the epigenetic reader Bromodomain Containing 4 (BRD4)62. Finally, our most recent discoveries highlight a role for nuclear metabolic activities in the regulation of correct mitosis progression25, nuclear scavenging of reactive oxygen species (ROS)26, and the regulation of nuclear NAD+ availability during the DNA damage response27. This growing body of evidence suggests that nuclear metabolic enzyme activity is a regulated process essential for chromatin function and more widespread than previously thought. However, a thorough analysis of metabolic enzymes in the nucleus has not been performed, leaving this hypothesis unproven.
With the goal of comprehensively identifying novel moonlighting or non-canonical nuclear functions of metabolic enzymes, we optimized a subcellular fractionation protocol that enriches chromatin-bound proteins. We tested this protocol across a panel of tissue types for both cancer cell lines and healthy primary cells. In addition to canonical chromatin proteins, we identified metabolic enzymes that consistently localize to chromatin, many with tissue- and cancer-specific localization. For shortlisted metabolic enzymes, we validated their chromatin and nuclear localization in cell lines and patient-derived tissue samples and explored their functional relationships on chromatin. Our study provides a unique compendium of chromatin-associated metabolic activities that will serve as the foundation for the global analysis of chromatin and nuclear metabolism.
To achieve the characterization of chromatin-bound proteins across tissue types, we optimized a previously published chromatin enrichment protocol62, consisting of sequential cytoplasmic and nuclear lysis followed by sonication and benzonase-mediated chromatin digestion to extract the chromatin-bound proteome (the chromatome) (Fig. 1A). We applied this new chromatome protocol to ten tissue types (Fig. 1B), comparing cancer and healthy cells. In total, we processed and analyzed 44 cancer cell lines and ten healthy primary cell types in duplicates, which provided a comprehensive collection of samples. For each of those samples, the detergent concentrations and lysis duration were adjusted to obtain the best purification possible (Supplementary Data 1). A visual inspection of the fractionation protocol was conducted utilizing immunofluorescence to ascertain that non-nuclear proteins were systematically depleted at each step prior to nuclear lysis (Fig. 1C and Appendix 1). To accomplish this, samples were stained with an antibody directed against mitochondrial Ferredoxin 1 (FDX1), a protein that, according to subcellular fractionation data28, exclusively resides in the mitochondria (Fig. S1A) and that has not been previously identified as enriched in chromatome-MS experiments conducted by our group26,27. Moreover, at the end of the protocol, we performed Western blot of focal adhesion (Vinculin), mitochondrial (FDX1) and histone H3 (H3) markers to verify the purity of our final samples (Fig. 1D and Appendix 2).
A Schematic representation of the optimized chromatin enrichment protocol used for proteomic profiling of chromatin-bound proteins. B Representation of the 10 different tissue types, which have undergone chromatin enrichment and chromatome proteomic characterization. C Immunofluorescence images of breast cancer cell lines and their nuclei captured at successive stages of the chromatome preparation protocol, used here as a quality control step. Images were acquired prior to nuclei lysis, with samples processed up to the point of sucrose gradient loading (see Methods section for details). DAPI (blue) and FDX1 (green) are shown. The experiment was conducted in three biological replicates. Scale bars are 5 µm. D Western blots of cytoplasmic and chromatin-enriched samples with cytoplasmic (Vinculin), chromatin (Histone 3) and mitochondrial markers (FDX1) across breast cancer cell lines, as in (C). The experiment was conducted in three biological replicates. E Total number of detected proteins at 1% FDR, with their respective PSMs per sample, acquired by DIA-MS and processed in DIA-NN in library-free mode. Cell lines are depicted by name, while non-cancerous cells per tissue type are annotated as “Normal”. F Known hu.MAP 2.0 complexes detected in chromatin samples with more than 20 subunits, with edges representing known protein–protein interactions from BioPlex 2.0. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Samples were acquired using data-independent acquisition mass spectrometry (DIA-MS) and, as expected, showed strong enrichment for nuclear and chromosome-related terms while being depleted of mitochondrial and cytoplasmic proteins (Fig. S1B, Source Data 1), further validating our protocol. We retrieved ~5100 proteins per sample, most quantified by multiple peptide-to-spectrum matches (PSMs), with high reproducibility in the number of retrieved proteins between biological replicates (Fig. 1E, Source Data 2). While most proteins were identified and quantified across the majority of samples (Fig. S1C, Source Data 3), some proteins were only sporadically detected (Supplementary Data 2).
Given that we expected most chromatin proteins to be present across tissues in our chromatome analysis, we hypothesized that proteins with sparse presence in our dataset would likely be non-chromatin proteins. To demonstrate this, we predicted sequence-based nuclear localization signals (NLS) genome-wide and used them as a proxy for nuclear proteins (Fig. S1D, Source Data 4) due to their agreement with known nuclear proteins29,30. We found that proteins with few missing values were enriched for NLS-containing nuclear proteins, while proteins detected sparsely lacked NLS signals. (Fig. S1E, Source Data 5). After filtering out these sparsely observed proteins, we defined a “core chromatome” consisting of 3467 proteins which were consistently found on chromatin across the majority of samples analyzed (Supplementary Data 3).
To benchmark our optimized chromatome protocol and data analysis, we compared the results with other publicly available chromatome extraction methods31,32,33. Our chromatome outperformed these approaches (Fig. S1F), even though it is based on native chromatin extraction without the use of fixatives that could increase the presence of false-negative chromatin interactions, chemicals that would interfere with DNA properties and cell behavior, or expensive beads that would make it unaffordable to scale up32,33. When we classified the chromatin-associated proteins identified by our newly developed protocol according to their subcellular annotation, we observed that approximately 42% were not currently annotated as nuclear factors (Fig. S1F). However, the intersection of our data with the OpenCell resource34 led us to conclude that most of these non-nuclear factors identified on chromatin have at least one nuclear interactor (Fig. S1G), which provides further support for their nuclear localization. Finally, given the fact that metabolic enzymes often act in complexes to facilitate the execution of stepwise reactions, we explored the presence of protein complexes on the chromatome with hu.MAP 2.035. As expected, we retrieved well-known chromatin complexes (Fig. 1F, Source Data 6) such as SWI/SNF and HDAC proteins as “core chromatome” proteins35,36. Interestingly, we also identified metabolic assemblies such as those involved in oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS).
Together, our annotated core chromatome reveals key chromatin regulators and metabolic complexes consistently associated with chromatin, strengthening the evidence for the nuclear localization of metabolic enzymes.
To further identify functional pathways on chromatin, we explored ‘Biological Processes' Gene Ontology (GO) terms enriched in the “core chromatome”. While we retrieved many well-characterized processes on chromatin, such as “DNA repair” and “DNA replication”, we also unexpectedly detected “ATP metabolic process”, a term mainly driven by proteins constituting the electron transport chain (ETC), such as members of the NADH:ubiquinone oxidoreductase (NDUF) supernumerary subunits (Fig. S2A, Source Data 7). In total, over 200 metabolic enzymes were identified within the chromatin environment, accounting for more than 7% of the proteins in the core chromatome (Fig. 2A and Supplementary Data 3), underscoring the broad integration of metabolic enzymes into nuclear functions. To investigate the evolutionary stages at which chromatin proteins emerged, we intersected the known localization of each “core chromatome” protein [either nuclear or non-nuclear according to the Human Protein Atlas (HPA)] with their evolutionary age (Fig. 2B, Source Data 8). We observed that most chromatin-bound proteins were already assigned a nuclear HPA annotation. However, many KEGG-related metabolic enzymes, excluding those with primarily epigenetic functions37, lacked such annotation. One example is NDUF subunit B11 (NDUFB11), which lacks a nuclear HPA label despite nuclear staining in HPA immunofluorescence images (Fig. 2B). This is similar to what is observed for enzymes such as Acyl-CoA Oxidase 1 (ACOX1) and Sirtuin 6 (SIRT6), which also show clear nuclear staining in HPA immunofluorescence images. However, unlike NDUFB11, both are annotated as nuclear by HPA. Interestingly, most enzymes have an evolutionary age pre-dating the eukaryotic branching event, regardless of their HPA annotation. This suggests that any nuclear function these proteins may perform on chromatin is highly likely to be a moonlighting function, as they did not co-evolve with the nuclear compartment.
A Pie chart showing the distribution of protein classes based on PANTHER ontology. Number and percentage of proteins are indicated. Protein class annotation was performed using the PANTHER classification system (v19.0) with non-redundant UniProt IDs from Supplementary Data 3, using the PANTHER Protein Class (PANTHER_PC) ontology90,91. Classes representing <5% of proteins were grouped as “Other,” and “Metabolite interconversion enzyme” was renamed “Metabolic enzyme” for clarity. Annotations were added to Supplementary Data 3. B Left panel: Evolutionary age of “core chromatome” proteins along with their HPA subcellular annotation. Proteins are highlighted by their canonical function marking epigenetic metabolic function (in red), metabolic function (in orange) or no metabolic function (in gray). Right panel: HPA immunofluorescence images showing subcellular localization of NDFB11, ACOX1 and SIRT6 (green), with Tubulin (red). Scale bar, 20 μm. C Percentage of detected proteins per KEGG metabolic pathway that are part of the “core chromatome”, for most complete and absent pathways. D Representation of the OXPHOS complexes, showing the percentage of detected proteins that are classified as “core chromatome” per complex as color gradient. E Hierarchical clustering of chromatin proteomic samples based on detection of metabolic KEGG enzymes, for pathways containing more than 10 member proteins. F Hierarchical clustering of chromatin proteomics samples based on relative intensity of “core chromatome” proteins detected in the samples. G Cell lineage clustering of chromatin proteomics samples based on relative intensity of KEGG “core chromatome” enzymes detected in the samples, with pathways containing less than 10 member proteins labeled as “other”. H Relative abundance of members of “oxidative phosphorylation” (left) and “steroid biosynthesis” (right) across tissue with more than four cell line samples. Differentially present pathways were determined by the ANOVA test with adjusted p-value (2.13E-17) **** ≤0.0001, and represented by different colors. For “oxidative phosphorylation”, number of datapoints is 150 per lineage while for “steroid biosynthesis” 20 datapoints per lineage. Boxplots were generated using ggplot2 with default Tukey definitions: the horizontal line is the median, the box spans the interquartile range (IQR), and whiskers extend to the farthest points within 1.5×IQR. I Relative abundance of each subunit of ubiquinol-cytochrome c oxidoreductase complex (Complex III) across the compared tissues. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
To specifically check which metabolic pathways were present on chromatin, we performed an enrichment analysis on our “core chromatome” against KEGG pathways38,39. Among other pathways, OXPHOS was found to be the most complete pathway on chromatin, with more than 60% of subunits identified in our entire dataset (Fig. 2C and Fig. S2B, Source Data 9 and 10). OXPHOS was followed by lysine degradation, which includes lysine methyltransferase family members that are well established to be on chromatin, such as the histone lysine methyltransferase (KMTs), the nuclear receptor binding SET domain protein (NSDs) and the SET domain-containing proteins (SETDs). Following the identification of OXPHOS subunits on chromatin, we then examined the chromatin presence per complex for the entire ETC (Fig. 2D, Source Data 11). We observed a high presence of subunits across all complexes, with the exception of Complex II, for which less than 50% of its protein members were found on chromatin. This may suggest that nuclear-encoded components may have acquired additional, mitochondria-independent functions in the nucleus, possibly reflecting an evolutionary adaptation.
To explore tissue-specific pathways on chromatin, we annotated “core chromatome” proteins using KEGG pathways and clustered proteins based on their detection in each sample. We observed a strong tissue-based clustering of samples, with blood, lung, skin, brain and cervix showing high consistency across cell lines, while breast and pancreas demonstrated high heterogeneity in the chromatome across cell lines (Fig. S2C, Source Data 12). Interestingly, proteins belonging to the “Thermogenesis” pathway, were consistently detected across samples, except in lung, colon and pancreas samples, suggesting their near absence from the chromatin environment in these tissues. The term “Thermogenesis” consisted primarily of OXPHOS-related proteins, which are generally not expected in the nucleus. This unexpected finding prompted us to explore whether other metabolic enzymes might also be enriched in our dataset. While lung samples were depleted in OXPHOS proteins, some breast samples appeared to be depleted in pyrimidine and pyruvate metabolism proteins (Fig. 2E, Source Data 13), suggesting tissue specificity of chromatin localization of these enzymes.
When looking at the protein abundance of the “core chromatome”, we observed a variation in the degree of chromatin enrichment, as quantified by total histone protein intensity across samples (Fig. S2D, Source Data 14). This variability is likely attributable to subtle, cell line-specific differences affecting the efficiency of cell lysis and chromatin enrichment. To enable comparison across samples for downstream analysis, we regressed all protein abundances against each sample's relative chromatin enrichment (Fig. S2E, Source Data 15). As expected, nuclear proteins showed positive regression coefficients, while non-nuclear proteins displayed negative ones. This pattern is exemplified by the nuclear protein H3-3 and the primarily non-nuclear protein LAMP2, which showed opposite trends in relation to chromatin enrichment, reflecting their relative chromatin associations40 (Fig. S2F). The effect of the relative chromatin enrichment per sample can be observed where the primary subcellular localization of a protein (e.g., chromatin or endoplasmic reticulum), is a large driving force on the quantified protein abundance (Fig. S2G, Source Data 16). This regression-based normalization removed the compartment-specific separation within our dataset (Fig. S2H17), with the largest differences on normalized chromatome abundances being present between blood, lung and skin cell lines, suggesting tissue-specific chromatin proteomic profiles (Fig. S2I, Source Data 18). When investigating proteins more enriched on chromatin in blood-derived cell lines compared to skin-derived ones, the GO term “Regulation of DNA replication” emerged as one of the top enriched categories in the blood samples. This enrichment is primarily driven by components of the minichromosome maintenance (MCM) complex, which was recently reported to be particularly abundant in blood cell lines41 (Fig. S2J). Further confirming our model, regression coefficients of each protein, representing relative protein proportion on chromatin, strongly agreed with hyperLOPIT subcellular annotations29 and the presence of NLS motifs for nuclear proteins (Fig. S2K, L, Source Data 19 and 20).
We noticed blood, skin, lung, and pancreas tissues to display more homogeneity regarding the abundance of chromatin-bound proteins, with the pancreatic cancer cell lines showing similarity to their respective non-cancerous tissue (Fig. 2F, Source Data 21). Focusing on metabolic pathways, we observed that enzymes on chromatin vary in a tissue-specific manner (Fig. 2G, Source Data 22). For instance, several samples, including those of skin, brain and breast, showed high levels of chromatin-bound OXPHOS subunits compared to lung samples, while blood samples exhibited higher chromatin levels of purine metabolism proteins (Fig. 2G and Fig. S3A, B). To systematically identify metabolic pathways differentially present between tissues, we compared the abundance of enzymes across KEGG pathways in tissues for which we analyzed more than five samples (Supplementary Data 4). When evaluating differentially present pathways between these tissues, we found OXPHOS to be preferentially more abundant in skin, colon and breast samples, while steroid biosynthesis was more abundant in colon and breast samples (Fig. 2H, Source Data 23). Interestingly, only OXPHOS-related subunits encoded by nuclear DNA were identified on chromatin, while none of the mitochondrially encoded subunits survived the regression workflow described above (Data 23). To explore whether the increased chromatin association of OXPHOS components is consistent across subunits, we compared the average chromatin abundance of ubiquinol-cytochrome c oxidoreductase complex (Complex III) subunits between lung and breast cancer cell lines, which confirmed that all detected subunits were consistently more enriched on chromatin in breast compared to lung (Fig. 2I, Source Data 24). Leveraging CCLE proteomics and transcriptomics data, we ascertained that the higher or lower chromatin presence of OXPHOS enzymes on chromatin is not a consequence of differential expression of these enzymes across cell types (Fig. S3C). To validate our MS data, we performed chromatin extraction followed by Western blot analysis in lung (Hcc44 and H460) and breast (MDA-MB-231 and MDA-MB-468) cancer cell lines. The results confirmed a higher presence of OXPHOS enzymes on chromatin in breast cancer cell lines than in lung cancer cell lines, Notably, this difference was not mirrored in their cytosolic abundance, suggesting tissue-specific, active recruitment of OXPHOS subunits to chromatin (Fig. S3D).
We next attempted to computationally explore the mechanisms driving enzyme nuclear localization. Although most of these enzymes are smaller than the ~80 kDa size threshold permitted by nuclear pore diffusion42,43, and thus would not require active transport, only a small fraction of their cellular pool was found on chromatin (Fig. S3E, Source Data 25). An exception was observed for enzymes with NLS signals and enzymatic functions, such as KMTs, which are canonically nuclear and showed high chromatin association. In contrast, enzymes specific to membrane-bound compartments, such as alpha-1,3-mannosyltransferase (ALG3) and the catalytic subunit STT3B of the oligosaccharyltransferase complex, were only minimally detected on chromatin. Finally, the presence of enzymes larger than 80 kDa that lack an NLS signal on chromatin suggests the involvement of alternative active mechanisms mediating their nuclear localization. This evidence, together with the uneven distribution of small enzymes between the nucleus and the rest of the cell, rules out the possibility that the nuclear localization of metabolic enzymes is controlled solely by passive diffusion. To further explore the mechanisms of nuclear localization and retention, we analyzed the interactome of OXPHOS enzymes using the OpenCell database34. Nearly all OXPHOS enzymes were found to interact with nuclear factors, with COX5A, a subunit of the cytochrome c oxidase complex (Complex IV), exhibiting the highest number of interactors. Among these, we identified FKBP Prolyl Isomerase 5 (FKBP5) and Lamin B1 (LMNB1) as key interactors of COX5A (Fig. S3F). FKBP5 acts as a co-chaperone in complex with Heat Shock Protein 90 (HSP90), regulating the nuclear trafficking of target proteins44. LMNB1 plays a crucial role in maintaining chromatin integrity, nuclear structure and the localization of nuclear proteins45. These interactions may thus provide insights into the nuclear shuttling and retention mechanisms of COX5A.
Taken together, our findings suggest that the nuclear localization of metabolic enzymes is more widespread than previously appreciated, with a notable enrichment of OXPHOS proteins. This raises the possibility that these enzymes may perform yet unidentified, moonlighting functions within the nuclear environment.
To corroborate the presence of metabolic enzymes in human cells, we focused on OXPHOS subunits and their differential localization in breast and lung cancer. We first performed high-throughput immunofluorescence analysis on breast and lung cancer cell lines to determine whether the differential localization previously observed in the chromatin compartment was also reflected in their nuclear levels. Our findings demonstrated a significant nuclear enrichment of OXPHOS subunits CYC1 (Complex III), COX4 (Complex IV), and ATP5A1 (Complex V) in breast cancer cell lines compared to lung cancer cell lines (Fig. 3A–C, Source Data 26). Notably, and particularly for COX4 and ATP5A1, the observed differences could not be attributed to variations in overall protein expression between cell lines, as their cytoplasmic abundance did not consistently mirror the nuclear trends (Fig. S4A–C). Interestingly, the three OXPHOS subunits exhibited distinct nuclear localization patterns, with COX4 showing prominent accumulation in nucleolus-like regions, particularly in breast cancer cells. Given that cell proliferation rates, cell cycle phase distribution, and phase duration vary across cell lines, and that some metabolic enzymes exhibit phase-specific nuclear localization25,26,27, we explored whether OXPHOS subunit localization is cell cycle-dependent. To address this, we classified cells into G1, S, and G2/M phases by combining nuclear size measurements with Hoechst intensity profiles from immunofluorescence imaging, as previously performed46,47. This allowed us to quantify nuclear OXPHOS subunit levels in a cell cycle–resolved manner. Our results showed that CYC1 nuclear (Fig. S4D) and cytoplasmic (Fig. S4G) abundance increased during cell cycle progression. However, cell cycle did not alter the nuclear (Fig. S4E, F) nor cytoplasmic (Fig. S4H, I) abundance of COX4 or ATP5A1. This suggests the existence of a distinct regulatory mechanism governing their nuclear localization, independent of cell cycle dynamics. To cross-validate the differential presence of OXPHOS subunits in the nucleus across different cell lines, we leveraged the HPA image dataset. The use of different antibodies and unrelated cell lines in the HPA database provided independent support for our observations. Consistent with our findings, nuclear staining of CYC1, COX4, and ATP5A1 was evident across cell lines, although its intensity and subnuclear distribution varied. The nucleolar localization of COX4 was also confirmed (Fig. 3D–F).
A–C Immunofluorescence-based quantification of nuclear CYC1 (A), COX4 (B), and ATP5A1 (C) intensities (log₂ normalized and scaled) in MDA-MB-231 and MDA-MB-468 (breast cancer cell lines) and Hcc44 and H460 (lung cancer cell lines), and experiment was conducted in three biological replicates. Outliers were removed (3 SD); statistical significance was assessed using unpaired two-tailed Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni correction. Three biological replicates were performed. Images were acquired in confocal mode, using a single sagittal z-plane through the middle of the nucleus and a 63× water-immersion objective. Data from each cell line presented in different color for clarity. Representative immunofluorescence images from MDA-MB-468 and Hcc44 cells are shown for each marker, displaying the nucleus (Hoechst, blue) and the respective protein (fire LUT). Scale bar, 10 µm. Dashed lines indicate nucleus segmentation. Sample size depicted on the figure. Boxplots were generated using ggplot2 with default Tukey definitions: the horizontal line is the median, the box spans the interquartile range (IQR), and whiskers extend to the farthest points within 1.5×IQR. D–F Representative immunofluorescence images of CYC1 (D), COX4 (E), and ATP5A1 (F), downloaded from the Human Protein Atlas (HPA) database. Images were adjusted to highlight subcellular localization of each enzyme (green) relative to the nucleus (blue, DAPI). Scale bar, 20 µm.
To validate these findings in human breast and lung tissue, both healthy and cancerous, we analyzed commercially available tissue microarrays (TMAs) comprising tumor tissue, adjacent tissue (AT), and normal adjacent tissue (NAT). The breast TMA (Supplementary Data 5) included 20 cases of invasive ductal carcinoma (primarily grade 2), two atypical medullary carcinomas, one mucinous adenocarcinoma, and one intraductal carcinoma, together with 24 unmatched AT and 24 unmatched NAT samples. The lung TMA (Supplementary Data 6) contained 33 cases of lung adenocarcinoma (mainly grade 2 and grade 3), each with matched AT and NAT samples. For automated, high-throughput analysis, we mapped nuclei coordinates using DAPI staining (Fig. S5A) and segmented each core with a density-based approach (Fig. S5B, C). Since tissue thickness caused some cells to be out of focus in single Z-planes, we acquired multiple optical sections and used our analysis pipeline to automatically select the optimal focal plane for each region based on nuclear edge contrast (Fig. S5D). This enabled accurate extraction of nuclear morphology and DAPI intensity from all in-focus cells (Fig. S5E). Following nuclei identification, we manually gated classification parameters, using nuclear morphology and DAPI intensity, to assign epithelial (normal or tumor) and stromal cell labels (Fig. S5F). Finally, data were further filtered to exclude artifacts and poorly segmented nuclei. We next compared nuclear levels of NDUFV1 (Complex I, Source Data 27 and 28), ATP5A1 (Complex V, Source Data 29 and 30) and COX4 (Complex IV, Source Data 31 and 32), across breast ductal carcinoma and lung adenocarcinoma samples, along with their respective NAT and AT samples (Fig. S6A–F), as these were the tumor types most represented in our cohort. For each staining round, we quantified the number of TMA cores passing all quality filters for each tissue condition (Fig. S6G), ensuring downstream analyses included only high-quality, reliably segmented regions. NDUFV1 showed a marked increase in nuclear localization in both breast ductal carcinoma (Fig. 4A) and lung adenocarcinoma samples (Fig. 4B) when compared to NAT and AT, across both stromal and epithelial compartments. In both cancerous tissue, epithelial cells exhibited slightly higher nuclear NDUFV1 levels than stromal cells. Moreover, nuclear NDUFV1 levels were markedly elevated in breast ductal carcinoma compared to lung adenocarcinoma, across both epithelial and stromal compartments (Fig. 4C), confirming what observed in breast and lung cancer cell lines. When analyzing nuclear ATP5A1, we found that its nuclear levels in breast ductal carcinoma remained relatively constant across epithelial and stromal compartments, as well as between tumor, NAT, and AT samples (Fig. 4D). In lung adenocarcinoma, however, a reduction in nuclear ATP5A1 was specifically observed in stromal cells within the tumor microenvironment, compared to stroma from NAT and AT regions. In contrast, epithelial cells, whether from tumor, NAT, or AT, showed no substantial variation (Fig. 4E). Furthermore, breast ductal carcinomas exhibited higher nuclear ATP5A1 levels than lung adenocarcinomas, in both stromal and tumor epithelial compartments (Fig. 4F), in line with the differences observed in cancer cell lines. Finally, COX4 analysis in breast tissue revealed that in AT, the nuclear localization of COX4 was lower in both stromal and epithelial cells compared to breast ductal carcinoma and NAT (Fig. 4G). In contrast, lung adenocarcinomas exhibited increased COX4 nuclear localization, which correlated with greater tissue aggressiveness in both the stromal and epithelial compartments (Fig. 4H). When comparing breast and lung samples, we observed a clear increase in COX4 nuclear localization in lung adenocarcinoma samples (Fig. 4I), a trend that differed from what was observed in cancer cell lines. However, only breast ductal adenocarcinoma samples displayed COX4 nucleolar localization (Fig. 4J), mirroring the pattern seen in breast cancer cell lines. To quantify the extent of COX4 nucleolar localization, we selected eight cores from each group: breast NAT tissues, breast ductal carcinomas, and lung adenocarcinomas. Two fields per core were analyzed, each containing at least 100 epithelial cells. This analysis revealed that COX4 nucleolar localization was absent in lung adenocarcinoma samples and almost undetectable in breast NAT samples. However, all breast ductal carcinoma samples exhibited some degree of COX4 nucleolar localization, with an average penetrance of ~10% (Fig. 4K, Source Data 33).
A–I Immunofluorescence-based quantification of per nucleus-mean nuclear intensities (log₂-normalized and scaled) for NDUFV1 (A–C), COX4 (D–F), and ATP5A1 (G–I) in tissue microarrays (TMAs) of breast and lung cancer. Panels A, D, G: breast TMA across normal adjacent tissue (NAT), adjacent tissue (AT), and carcinoma. Panels B, E, H: lung TMA across NAT, AT, and carcinoma grades 2 and 3. Panels C, F, I: comparison of nuclear intensities between breast and lung cancer TMA cores. For all panels, outliers were removed (3 SD), and statistical significance was assessed using unpaired two-tailed Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni correction. Data from grade presented in different color for clarity. Sample size depicted on the figure. Boxplots were generated using ggplot2 with default Tukey definitions: the horizontal line is the median, the box spans the interquartile range (IQR), and whiskers extend to the farthest points within 1.5×IQR. Number of datapoints per group are available in the Source Data for all comparisons. J Representative immunofluorescence images from breast NAT, breast ductal carcinoma, and lung adenocarcinoma. Left panels: merged images stained for DAPI (red) and COX4 (green). Right panels: COX4 (fire LUT) and DAPI (gray). White arrows indicate COX4 nucleolar localization. Scale bar, 10 µm. Sample size depicted on the figure. K Mean fraction of segmented nuclei with COX4-positive nucleolar staining (COX4⁺) across two representative images from eight different TMA cores per group (breast NAT, breast carcinoma, lung carcinoma). Error bars represent standard deviation (SD); p values were calculated using unpaired two-tailed Wilcoxon test. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
Overall, these data suggest that the nuclear localization of OXPHOS subunits is a widespread phenomenon that depends on both the cell and tumor type. This observation raises the possibility that the nuclear localization of OXPHOS subunits may be essential for maintaining specific cellular states, or perhaps a consequence of certain cellular phenotypes.
Among proteins which we identified consistently on chromatin, 335 proteins were differentially present in at least one cancer type, compared to its non-cancerous counterpart (Fig. 5A, Source Data 34). Surprisingly, metabolic enzymes, in addition to being present on chromatin in a tissue-specific manner, also seemed to be differentially abundant in cancer. For instance, Acyl-CoA-binding domain-containing protein 5 (ACBD5) was significantly more abundant on chromatin in liver cancer, while depleted in cervix and prostate cancer (Fig. 5B, Source Data 35). Similarly, ATP synthase membrane subunit j (ATP5MJ), was more abundant in cervix cancer and depleted from brain and skin cancers (Fig. 5B, Source Data 36). Although both proteins showed nuclear localization, further supporting our data of OXPHOS subunits being in the nucleus, there was no previous characterization of their nuclear function despite evidence from HPA immunofluorescence (Fig. 5C).
A Chromatin-associated proteins differentially abundant across cancer lineages relative to healthy counterparts, defined as the 1% most extreme z-values per tissue. B ACBD5 and ATP5MJ relative protein abundance in chromatin samples, based on lineage, with abundance in healthy counterpart represented as a red point, while statistically significant samples are highlighted in blue (depleted) and brown (enriched). Significantly changing proteins were determined by taking the top 1% of most differentially abundant proteins between respective cancer and normal sample (two-sided). C Immunofluorescence images of ACBD5 (top) and ATP5MJ (bottom) (green) within Tubulin-stained cells (red) in prostate cancer (PC-3) and skin cancer (A-431) cell lines. Images were obtained from the HPA dataset. Scale bar, 20 μm. D Nuclear related GO-terms enriched in ProHD interactors of metabolic enzymes, with enzymes functionally associated to one significant term depicted. E Hierarchical clustering of spearman correlations based on normalized protein abundances across chromatin samples with positive relationships indicating covarying proteins across samples. F Network of statistically significant biological processes correlated with “one-carbon by folate” pathway enzymes, based on normalized chromatin-bound protein intensities. Proteins positively correlated with “one-carbon by folate” enzymes are represented as weighted edges; edge thickness corresponds to correlation strength. G Relative protein abundance per sample for GART-POLD1 and SHMT2-MCM7 protein correlation pairs across tissue types. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
To elucidate protein function on chromatin, we explored protein covariation partners in ProteomeHD (ProHD), which had previously shown that covarying proteins are functionally related48. Specifically focusing on “core chromatome” enzymes that covary with known nuclear proteins, we identify DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1) with the highest number of nuclear ‘GO term enrichments' (Fig. 5D, Source Data 37), which were mostly related to chromosome organization (Fig. S7A), validating the use of the ProHD dataset to investigate protein function via covariation. Additionally, we also identified numerous other enzymes that have known moonlighting localizations within the nucleus, including guanosine monophosphate synthetase (GMPS)49, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH)50, inosine-5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase 2 (IMPDH2)27,51, and adenosylhomocysteinase (AHCY)10 (Fig. 5D, Source Data 37), associated with multiple nuclear GO terms. We applied the protein covariation workflow to our “core chromatome” data as a functional characterization approach. Proteins already annotated as functionally related by ProHD (Fig. S7B, Source Data 38), appeared highly correlated in our dataset (Fig. 5E, Source Data 39). Proteins highly covarying on chromatin tended to belong to the same chromatin complexes, which is expected since complex members are known to be highly regulated at the protein level (Fig. S7C, Source Data 40). Further exploiting this covariation analysis of our data focusing on metabolic enzymes, we discovered that the chromatin localization of ‘one carbon by folate' metabolic enzymes is functionally related to proteins belonging to chromosome organization, DNA metabolism, and DNA damage and repair (Fig. 5F). Next, we asked whether these proteins are related in a tissue-specific or pan-cancer manner. While trifunctional purine biosynthetic protein adenosine-3 (GART) and DNA polymerase delta catalytic subunit (POLD1) correlated across tissues, the relationship between serine hydroxymethyltransferase (SHMT2) and DNA replication licensing factor MCM7 (MCM7) was mainly driven by their high abundance in blood chromatin samples (Fig. 5G, Source Data 40). To validate the chromatin differential presence of ‘one carbon by folate' metabolic enzymes, we ranked cancer cell lines based on their chromatin abundance, specifically checking for the enzymes 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide ribonucleotide formyltransferase/IMP cyclohydrolase (ATIC), GART, MTHFD1, and IMPDH2 (Fig. S7D). Interestingly, HCT116 colorectal cancer cells ranked among the least for chromatin abundance of these enzymes which are potentially related to DNA damage repair mechanism. This is interesting because this cell line is almost-diploid and usually does not show genomic instability. On the other hand, HeLa cells, which have a highly abnormal karyotype and often present genomic instability, ranked among the top. Western blot analysis on chromatin fraction confirmed our chromatome-MS findings, showing that HeLa cells exhibit higher levels of ‘one-carbon by folate' enzymes compared to HCT116 cells (Fig. S7E).
By quantitatively detecting moonlighting proteins on chromatin and performing covariation analysis across such a large and diverse dataset, we were able to propose a functional characterization for enzymes that are otherwise hard to confidently detect on chromatin.
To demonstrate a direct relationship between DNA damage and the chromatin localization of one-carbon by folate enzymes, we investigated whether their nuclear association changes during the DNA damage response and repair. To this end, HeLa cells were exposed to ionizing radiation (10 Gy) and fixed either immediately (0 h post-irradiation) or after 8 and 24 hours of recovery, in order to track the repair process over time. High-throughput immunofluorescence for γH2AX, a marker of double-strand breaks, was used to quantify DNA damage levels at each time point (Data 41). As expected, irradiation induced substantial DNA damage, which progressively decreased during recovery (Fig. S8A–D). Under these conditions, we examined the dynamic chromatin recruitment of MTHFD1 (Fig. 6A), ATIC (Fig. 6B), GART (Fig. 6C), and IMPDH2 (Fig. 6D). The early nuclear response varied among enzymes: MTHFD1, ATIC, and IMPDH2 levels decreased on chromatin immediately after damage but returned to baseline (IMPDH2 and ATIC) or increased beyond baseline (MTHFD1) after 8 h of recovery. In contrast, GART showed a steady increase in nuclear recruitment across all time points following irradiation. By 24 h post-irradiation, all monitored enzymes exhibited a significant nuclear increase. To further dissect these dynamics, we stratified cells by cell cycle phase using combined Hoechst intensity and nuclear size measurements. We observed that the temporal pattern of nuclear localization for each enzyme was conserved across G1, S, and G2/M phases (Fig. S8E–H). Moreover, γH2AX staining confirmed that double-strand breaks were induced to a similar extent regardless of the cell cycle phase (Fig. S8I–L), supporting the notion that the observed enzyme dynamics are broadly consistent across the proliferative landscape. Finally, to directly assess whether nuclear accumulation of one-carbon enzymes is linked to the extent of DNA damage at the single-cell level, we performed correlation analyses between γH2AX intensity and nuclear enzyme abundance within individual cells at each time point following damage release (Fig. S8M–P). This approach allowed us to determine whether cells with higher levels of DNA damage also exhibited stronger nuclear recruitment of enzymes. Across all four enzymes, MTHFD1, ATIC, GART, and IMPDH2, we observed a positive correlation between γH2AX and nuclear signal, indicating that chromatin association scales with the degree of damage in individual cells. However, the strength and persistence of this correlation varied among enzymes. GART and IMPDH2 consistently displayed strong positive correlations, including at 24 h post-irradiation, when overall γH2AX levels declined, suggesting a sustained chromatin association even after damage resolution. In contrast, MTHFD1 showed a more transient relationship, with moderate correlations at early time points that diminished by 24 h. ATIC exhibited intermediate behavior, with correlations emerging during recovery but not persisting robustly at later stages. These cell-by-cell analyses provide orthogonal evidence that nuclear recruitment of one-carbon enzymes is driven by DNA damage and further reveal distinct recruitment kinetics among them. In particular, the persistent association of GART and IMPDH2 with γH2AX-positive cells suggests a tighter functional coupling to the DNA damage landscape than observed for MTHFD1 or ATIC.
A–D Immunofluorescence-based quantification of nuclear MTHFD1 (A), ATIC (B), GART (C), and IMPDH2 (D) in irradiated or control HeLa cells, following recovery for 0, 8, or 24 h (log2 mean intensities; hR hour post release). Boxplots were generated using ggplot2 with default Tukey definitions: the horizontal line is the median, the box spans the interquartile range (IQR), and whiskers extend to the farthest points within 1.5×IQR. Outliers were removed (3 SD); statistical significance was assessed using unpaired two-tailed Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni correction. Three biological replicates were performed. Images were acquired in confocal mode, using a single sagittal z-plane through the middle of the nucleus and a 63× water-immersion objective. Representative immunofluorescence images of HeLa cells are shown for each condition, displaying the nucleus (Hoechst, blue), γH2AX (magenta), and the respective enzyme (green); scale bar, 10 µm. Dashed lines indicate nucleus segmentation. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
To dissect the distinct roles of IMPDH2 in the nucleus and cytoplasm, we examined how each compartmental pool rewires the transcriptome. For this, we used previously generated IMPDH2 knockout (KO) MDA-MB-231 cells27 reconstituted with either wild-type (WT) IMPDH2, a nucleus-restricted variant bearing a nuclear localization sequence (NLS), or a cytoplasm-restricted variant bearing a nuclear export sequence (NES), and performed RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) (Fig. 7A). Additionally, we included a condition in which IMPDH2-KO cells were supplemented with guanosine [KO(+G)], the end-product of IMPDH2 catalysis that has previously been shown to rescue the cell-cycle defect of KO cells27, to distinguish guanosine-dependent from guanosine-independent effects of the reconstitutions (Data 42). Principal component analysis (PCA) and sample-to-sample Euclidean distance clustering revealed clear segregation of biological replicates, with KO cells being the most transcriptionally divergent, whereas reconstituted lines (WT, NLS, NES) were more similar to each other, with the NLS reconstitution most closely resembling WT (Fig. S9A, B). Examination of the principal components revealed that PC1 primarily separated KO cells from those reconstituted or cultured in the presence of guanosine, indicating that the biological processes represented along this axis are guanosine-availability dependent. Consistent with the essential role of guanine nucleotides in DNA synthesis, genes contributing to PC1 were enriched for cell-cycle–related Gene Ontology (GO) terms, including chromosome segregation and DNA replication (Fig. S9C and Data 43). In contrast, PC2 distinguished reconstituted lines from KO cells and contained genes involved in nucleotide biosynthesis as well as chromatin-associated processes such as telomere maintenance, RNA splicing, and ribosome biogenesis, highlighting IMPDH2 functions that may extend beyond nucleotide supply (Fig. S9D and Data 44). The comparison of WT-reconstituted cells with KO cells, either untreated or supplemented with guanosine, revealed extensive differential gene expression (Fig. S9E, F) with minimal overlap between the two comparisons (Fig. S9G), confirming the profound impact of guanosine biosynthesis on transcriptional regulation. In contrast, reconstitution with either nuclear or cytoplasmic IMPDH2 resulted in only minor transcriptional divergence from the WT-reconstituted cells (Fig. 7B, C), indicating that under baseline, unstimulated conditions, the predominant role of IMPDH2 in maintaining cellular homeostasis is the synthesis of guanosine nucleotides. Nonetheless, among the limited set of genes that did change, some exhibited opposite expression trends between NLS- and NES-reconstitutions relative to WT, revealing that even at steady state, a proper spatial balance of IMPDH2 is required for the fine-tuning of basal transcription. Among the oppositely regulated genes, DDB1- and CUL4-associated factor 8-like protein 1 (DCAF8L1), an adapter of the cullin-4 (CUL4) E3 ubiquitin ligase complex that directs breast cancer type 1 susceptibility protein (BRCA1) and BRCA1-associated RING domain protein 1 (BARD1) for proteasomal degradation52,53, was significantly upregulated in NES and downregulated in NLS cells when compared to WT. Together with our previous finding that nuclear IMPDH2 interacts with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1) to promote DNA repair27, these data suggest a complementary mechanism by which nuclear IMPDH2 supports chromatin integrity by restraining DCAF8L1 expression, thereby preserving BRCA1/BARD1 stability. In agreement with this model, high-throughput immunofluorescence revealed that, although WT-reconstituted cells displayed more BRCA1 foci during S and G2 phases (Fig. 7D–F), NLS-reconstituted cells showed higher overall BRCA1 protein levels in these phases when compared to WT (Fig. 7E, F), consistent with reduced BRCA1 turnover when DCAF8L1 is suppressed. Further supporting this hypothesis, this regulation appeared to be post-transcriptional, as BRCA1 mRNA levels were unchanged across conditions (Fig. S9H), and it was not attributable to increased DNA damage in NLS cells, given γH2AX levels comparable with WT (Fig. 7F, G). Finally, we observed a higher fraction of NLS-reconstituted cells in S phase (Fig. S9I), suggesting slower replication and sustained replication-stress signaling, conditions under which BRCA1 accumulation without a proportional increase in discrete foci could occur54,55. To further explore this connection, we assembled a BRCA/DNA damage response (DDR)-focused signature panel by combining curated gene sets related to DNA repair and cell-cycle regulation (Fig. 7H). Gene set variation analysis (GSVA) across conditions (Data 45) recapitulated the global trends described above: KO cells failed to activate DNA repair pathways, consistent with impaired recovery and reduced viability, whereas guanosine supplementation largely restored this phenotype. Interestingly, pathway activities associated with double-strand break (DSB) repair, such as “double-strand break repair via classical nonhomologous end joining”, “meiotic DNA double-strand break formation”, “DNA double-strand break processing”, and “double-strand break repair via single-strand annealing”, were markedly less active in guanosine-treated KO cells compared with WT, NLS-, or NES-reconstituted cells. These findings suggest that efficient activation of DSB repair pathways requires both IMPDH2 catalytic function and its proper spatial regulation within the cell. When comparing the NES and NLS reconstitutions, additional differences emerged: NES-reconstituted cells were less able to activate pathways involved in “DNA alkylation repair”, “nucleotide excision repair”, and “UV-damage excision repair” when compared to WT and NLS cells, whereas NLS-reconstituted cells showed less active “single-strand break (SSB) repair”, “pyrimidine dimer repair”, and transcription-coupled nucleotide excision repair.
A Representative immunofluorescence images showing IMPDH2 (FIRE_Lut and Green) and DAPI (Gray) staining in IMPDH2 KO MDA-MB-231 cells reconstituted with IMPDH2-WT (WT), NLS and NES. Scale bar, 10 µm. Experiment was conducted in three biological replicates. B, C Volcano plots of differential gene expression in MDA-MB-231 IMPDH2-KO cells reconstituted with IMPDH2-NES (NES) (B) or IMPDH2-NLS (NLS) (C) compared with IMPDH2-WT (WT). Statistical significant was assessed by a moderated two-sided t-test, and with Benjamini–Hochberg multiple testing correction. Significantly up- and downregulated genes were defined by adjusted P < 0.01 and |log₂ fold-change|>1. Selected genes of interest (IL13RA2, CCL2, OLFML1, IMPDH2, DCAF8L1) are labeled. D, E Quantification of BRCA1 foci per nucleus (D) and nuclear BRCA1 integrated intensity (E) in IMPDH2 KO MDA-MB-231 cells reconstituted with IMPDH2-WT or IMPDH2-NLS cells across cell-cycle phases (G1, S, G2). Outliers (±5 s.d.) were removed; 1172 cells in D and 1173 cells in E were analyzed per phase and condition. Statistical significance was assessed by unpaired two-tailed Wilcoxon test. Boxplots were generated using ggplot2 with default Tukey definitions: the horizontal line is the median, the box spans the interquartile range (IQR), and whiskers extend to the farthest points within 1.5×IQR. F Representative immunofluorescence images of BRCA1, γH2AX, and DAPI staining in IMPDH2 KO MDA-MB-231 cells reconstituted with IMPDH2-WT (WT) or IMPDH2-NLS. Scale bar, 10 µm. G Quantification of γH2AX foci per nucleus in MDA-MB-231 WT and NLS cells across cell-cycle phases (G1, S, G2). Outliers (±5 s.d.) were removed; 1184 cells per phase and condition were analyzed. P values were determined by unpaired two-tailed Wilcoxon test. Boxplots were generated using ggplot2 with default Tukey definitions: the horizontal line is the median, the box spans the interquartile range (IQR), and whiskers extend to the farthest points within 1.5×IQR. H Heatmaps of GO DNA repair signatures showing activity scores in IMPDH2 KO MDA-MB-231 cells, and reconstituted with IMPDH2-WT, IMPDH2-NES, IMPDH2-NLS, or treated with guanosine [400 µM; KO( + G)]. I Heatmaps of curated GO and Reactome ERK signaling signatures showing activity scores in IMPDH2 KO MDA-MB-231 cells, and reconstituted with IMPDH2-WT, IMPDH2-NES, IMPDH2-NLS, or treated with guanosine [400 µM; KO(+G)]. J Heatmap of genes within the REACTOME pathways “REACTOME_MAPK1_ERK2_ACTIVATION” and “REACTOME_MAPK3_ERK1_ACTIVATION” showing differential activity in IMPDH2 KO MDA-MB-231 cells, and reconstituted with IMPDH2-WT, IMPDH2-NES, IMPDH2-NLS, or treated with guanosine [400 µM; KO(+G)]. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
To extend our analysis beyond the role of compartmentalized IMPDH2 in DNA damage repair, we focused on another gene that was differentially regulated between NLS and NES reconstitutions when compared to WT: chemokine (C–C motif) ligand 2 (CCL2), which was upregulated in NLS-reconstituted relative to NES-reconstituted cells (Fig. 7B, C). CCL2 has been reported to enhance extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) signaling in breast cancer56,57,58,59. Consistent with this, NLS-reconstituted cells exhibited elevated activity of an ERK1/2 activation gene signature, indicating that nuclear IMPDH2-driven CCL2 upregulation has functional consequences for mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway activity (Fig. 7I). In contrast, NES-reconstituted cells showed increased expression of a phospho-ERK-regulated gene signature despite having the lowest CCL2 levels, potentially reflecting a compensatory transcriptional response to reduced ERK1/2 signaling (Data 46). Examination of ERK pathway regulators revealed distinct expression patterns between NLS- and NES-reconstituted cells: NLS-reconstituted cells showed higher expression of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 2 (MAP2K2, MEK2) and mitogen-activated protein kinase 3 (MAPK3, ERK1), which form the MEK2–ERK1 module, whereas NES-reconstituted cells displayed higher levels of mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 1 (MAP2K1, MEK1) and mitogen-activated protein kinase 1 (MAPK1, ERK2), corresponding to the MEK1–ERK2 module (Fig. 7J). Thus, the subcellular localization of IMPDH2 appears to influence the relative activation of ERK1 and ERK2 pathways, with potential downstream effects on cellular phenotypes such as growth, proliferation, and apoptosis. Interestingly, while guanosine supplementation rescued the expression of MAPK1 and MAP2K1 in KO cells, it failed to restore MAPK3 and MAP2K2 levels. Because MAPK3 and MAP2K2 were upregulated in NLS- and WT-reconstituted cells, this pattern likely reflects a guanosine-independent nuclear role of IMPDH2. These findings suggest that nuclear IMPDH2 may directly modulate transcription, consistent with previous evidence of its transcriptional regulatory role in Drosophila and mouse60,61.
Together, our data show that, under baseline conditions, IMPDH2 mainly supports transcription through guanosine nucleotide synthesis, yet its spatial distribution adds a regulatory layer. Nuclear IMPDH2 contributes to genome stability by restraining DCAF8L1 and modulating BRCA1/BARD1 turnover, and biases MAPK signaling toward the MEK2–ERK1 axis, revealing a possible guanosine-independent nuclear role in transcriptional control.
While moonlighting of specific metabolic enzymes has long been recognized, recent evidence suggests that nuclear moonlighting is far more widespread than previously appreciated. Here, we provide the first systematic, high-throughput profiling of chromatin-bound proteins across diverse healthy and cancerous cell types, revealing that the nuclear presence of metabolic enzymes is a universal, yet tissue- and cancer-specific, feature. This large-scale chromatome atlas challenges the traditional cytoplasmic-centric view of metabolism by demonstrating that metabolic enzymes consistently localize to chromatin, often in a lineage-specific manner, and can be dynamically regulated in response to cellular stress.
Notably, we demonstrate that chromatin-associated metabolic enzymes vary between cancer types and even across samples from the same tissue, as in breast and pancreatic cancers, which are known for their heterogeneity. This observation suggests that the nuclear metabolic signature may reflect or even reinforce cell identity. In this context, our study suggests the hypothesis that nuclear metabolism may be linked to cell state transitions such as differentiation, carcinogenesis, or aging, all of which involve large-scale chromatin remodeling. This raises the intriguing possibility that nuclear metabolic composition may act both as a sensor and effector of epigenetic reprogramming.
Among the most striking findings of our study is the widespread chromatin association of oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) enzymes. These proteins, classically confined to mitochondria, were consistently detected on chromatin in a tissue-specific manner, particularly enriched in breast cancer cells and depleted in lung cancer samples. While this finding suggests a potentially unexplored dimension of nuclear metabolism, we emphasize that the presence of OXPHOS enzymes on chromatin does not necessarily imply enzymatic activity in the nuclear compartment. Their precise role, whether structural, regulatory, or metabolic, remains to be determined. Nonetheless, their selective chromatin localization argues against passive diffusion and points toward a regulated, potentially functional nuclear presence. Moreover, our tissue microarray analysis confirmed an additional layer of subnuclear localization: while overall COX4 nuclear levels were lower in breast than in lung cancer, we observed a consistent nucleolar localization of COX4 in breast cancer samples, which was absent in lung cancer and in normal breast tissue. This evidence proposes that nucleolar localization of COX4 may emerge as a feature of breast cell transformation. It is important to note that we did not stratify patient samples by mutational status or molecular subtype; further work is needed to determine whether specific oncogenic alterations or tumor contexts drive this phenomenon. While the functional relevance of nucleolar localization of OXPHOS subunits remains to be elucidated, these observations raise the possibility of novel links between subnuclear localization of metabolic enzymes, nucleolar function, and cancer biology.
Our data also challenge the long-standing assumption that size exclusion through the nuclear pore and the presence of an NLS strictly dictate nuclear residency. Although many metabolic enzymes are small enough to diffuse through the nuclear pore, their nuclear, chromatin presence is clearly regulated, as evidenced by both their selective enrichment and functional correlations. Furthermore, larger enzymes lacking NLS are still detected on chromatin, indicating alternative, possibly active import or retention mechanisms. The identification of nuclear interactors such as LMNB1 and FKBP5 in complex with COX5A supports a model in which nuclear residency is facilitated by scaffold or transport proteins, potentially offering new therapeutic entry points.
Functionally, we uncover a robust association between nuclear folate pathway enzymes and the DNA damage response. We show that enzymes such as MTHFD1, ATIC, IMPDH2, and GART are dynamically recruited to chromatin upon ionizing radiation and that their nuclear abundance scales with the extent of DNA damage. This extends prior work on MTHFD1's interaction with BRD4 in transcriptional regulation62 and suggests a parallel role in genome integrity. Notably, we previously demonstrated that IMPDH2 localizes to chromatin specifically during the late stages of the DNA damage response27, supporting its direct involvement in damage resolution. The persistence of GART and IMPDH2 on chromatin even after γH2AX signal decline further hints at roles in post-repair chromatin reconfiguration or nucleotide replenishment. These findings prompt further investigation into whether these enzymes form functional nuclear complexes analogous to cytoplasmic purinosomes63, thereby coordinating localized nucleotide synthesis during repair.
Mechanistically, our covariation analysis, DNA damage assays, and transcriptional profiling of compartmentalized IMPDH2 cells suggest that these enzymes are not randomly associated with chromatin, but rather participate in coordinated functional modules. This is consistent with a model in which nuclear metabolism is not merely supportive but structurally integrated with chromatin function. The implications of this are significant, as the nucleus may harbor compartmentalized pools of metabolic activity that directly influence gene expression, DNA repair, and chromatin architecture.
From a translational standpoint, our work opens new avenues for biomarker discovery and therapeutic intervention. Nuclear levels of specific metabolic enzymes, such as IMPDH2 or MTHFD1, may serve as predictive markers of DNA repair capacity, chromatin state, or therapy response. Moreover, the machinery mediating nuclear import or retention of these enzymes may offer selective vulnerabilities, particularly in cancer cells that rely on aberrant nuclear metabolic programs.
While our study provides the first systematic landscape of chromatin-bound metabolic enzymes, it is not without limitations. Our data capture a static snapshot and cannot resolve temporal dynamics or functional causality. Moreover, the precise enzymatic activities and metabolic fluxes occurring within the nucleus remain largely unexplored. To address this, future work should combine nuclear-targeted metabolic biosensors with genetic perturbations, such as knockdown, overexpression, or forced mislocalization, to assess whether these enzymes are catalytically active on chromatin. In parallel, emerging technologies in nuclear and spatial metabolomics, including subcellular-resolution mass spectrometry imaging, will be critical to profile local metabolite pools and map their fluxes at the level of nuclear microenvironments. Such integrative approaches will be key to uncovering the functional consequences of nuclear metabolic rewiring and distinguishing structural, regulatory, and enzymatic roles of chromatin-bound enzymes, thereby reinforcing the view of nuclear metabolism as a regulated and functionally relevant aspect of chromatin biology.
All cell lines were cultured at 37 °C in 5% CO2. The culture conditions are specified in Supplementary Data 1. Cell cultures were tested every month for mycoplasma contamination.
To validate the specific fractionation conditions for each cell line by immunofluorescence (IF), 2.5 × 106 cellular pellets were first resuspended in 75 µL of PBS. Immediately, a 15 µL aliquot (whole-cells) was taken and fixed in methanol 100% for later IF analysis. About 75 µL of CHAPS (3-cholamidopropyl dimethylammonium 1-propane sulfonate) buffer (in 1x PBS) was added to the sample to break the cytosolic membrane. The concentration and time of lysis for each cell line is specified in Supplementary Data 1. Cell lysates were checked at the microscope to verify the correct cell lysis. Then, lysed cells were centrifuged for 5 min at 720×g at 4 °C and the supernatant was discarded. The nuclear pellet was resuspended in cytoplasmic lysis buffer (IGEPAL 0.1%, NaCl 150 mM, Tris-HCl 10 mM, pH 7 in H2O), where a 100 µL aliquot (dirty nucleus) was taken and fixed in methanol 100% for later IF. The rest of the sample was placed on the top of a sucrose gradient buffer (NaCl 150 mM, sucrose 25%, Tris-HCl 10 mM, pH 7 in H2O) and centrifuged for 15 min at 10,000×g at 4 °C. Purified nuclei were then washed three times by resuspending in Nuclei Washing Buffer (EDTA 1 mM and IGEPAL 0.1% in PBS) and centrifuged for 5 min at 1200×g at 4 °C. Finally, the resulting sample (clean nuclei) was resuspended in methanol 100% for later IF.
To obtain the chromatome samples for mass spectrometry, 5 × 106 cellular pellets were first resuspended in 150 µL of CHAPS Buffer to break the cytosolic membrane. The concentration and time of lysis for each cell line is specified in Supplementary Data 1. Then, lysed cells were centrifuged for 5 min at 720×g at 4 °C and the supernatant was harvested as the cytosolic fraction. The nuclear pellet was resuspended in cytoplasmic lysis buffer and placed on the top of a sucrose gradient buffer) and centrifuged for 15 min at 10,000×g at 4 °C. Purified nuclei were then washed three times by resuspending in Nuclei Washing Buffer and centrifuged for 5 min at 1200×g at 4 °C. Then, the washed nuclear pellet was resuspended in Nuclei Resuspension Buffer (EDTA 1 mM, NaCl 75 mM, 50% sucrose, Tris-HCl 20 mM, pH 8 in H2O) and the nuclear membrane was lysed by adding Nuclei Lysis Buffer (EDTA 0.2 mM, HEPES 20 mM pH 7.5, IGEPAL 0.1%, NaCl 300 mM in H2O), vortexing and incubating for 5 min. After centrifugation for 2 min at 16,000×g at 4 °C, the resulting chromatin was resuspended in Benzonase Digestion Buffer (15 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 0.1% IGEPAL, TPCK 5 mg/mL in H2O) and sonicated on a Bioruptor Pico (Diagenode) for 15 cycles 30 s ON/30 s OFF in 1.5 mL Diagenode tubes (Diagenode; #C30010016). Finally, sonicated chromatin was digested with benzonase enzyme (VWR; #706643; 2.5U) for 30 min at room temperature (RT), and the resulting sample was harvested as chromatome fraction. All the steps were performed on ice and all buffers were supplemented with proteinase inhibitors (Roche; #4693132001). Cytosolic and chromatome extracts were quantified by Micro BCA™ Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #23235) according to manufacturer instructions.
Samples collected before lysis, at the pre-nuclear wash, and post-nuclear wash phases of the fractionation protocol were used for IF to validate the integrity of the fractions. Briefly, samples were fixed in methanol overnight, and IF was performed in black 96-well plates for microscopy. Fixed samples were spun down at 1000 RCF and resuspended in PBS. Each sample was then placed in one well of the 96-well plate and the plate was centrifuged at 4 oC, 1500 RCF for 15 min to attach the cells to the bottom. The PBS was then gently aspirated using a pipette and samples incubated in TBP (0.1% Triton X-100 in 2% BSA/PBS) for 30 min at RT. TBP was then aspirated gently using a pipette and samples incubated with the primary antibodies. Staining for mitochondria was done using 30 µL of 1:200 dilution (in 0.5% BSA/PBS) FDX1 antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, PA559653) for 1 h at RT. Samples were washed twice with PBS and further incubated with 30 µL of 1:200 Alexa Fluor 488 secondary antibody in 0.5% BSA/PBS. Following two washes with PBS, nuclear staining was done using 1:1000 dilution (in PBS) of DAPI64 for 5 min at RT. Then, following a PBS wash, samples were imaged.
Imaging was done using confocal microscopy on the LEICA TCS SP5 inverted microscope in collaboration with the advanced light microscopy unit (ALMU) at CRG, Barcelona. This microscope is equipped with Leica inverted confocal system (405, 458, 476, 488, 496, 514, 561, and 633 nm lasers). The 405 laser and the 488 laser were used for excitation of DAPI (Ex: 405 nm/Em: 461 nm) and FDX1 (Ex: 488 nm/Em:515 nm). Image acquisition was performed under oil immersion at 63x magnification. Visualization and figure assimilation was done with the help of ImageJ65,66.
Cytoplasmic and chromatin fractions were quantified by Micro BCA™ Protein Assay Kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #23235) according to manufacturer instructions. Proteins were resolved on 4–20% gradient precast Mini-PROTEAN TGX polyacrylamide gels (BIO-RAD;#4561094) and transferred to a 0.45 mm nitrocellulose blotting membrane (AmershamTM #10600002) for immunoblotting. Primary antibodies used were Vinculin (E1E9V) XP® (Cell Signaling Technology #13901; 1:1000), NDUFS3 (abcam #ab177471, 1:1000), SDHA (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #PA5-66693; 1:1000), UQCRB (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #PA5-106324; 1:1000), COX4 (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #PA5-19471; 1:1000), COX5A (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #PA5-27432; 1:1000), ATP5A1 (abcam; #ab14748; 1:1000), FDX1 (Thermo Fisher Scientific #PA5-59653, 1:1000), Histone H3 (1B1B2) (Cell Signaling Technology #14269, 1:10000), MTHFD1 (ProteinTech; #10794-1-AP; 1:1000), ATIC (ProteinTech; #11099-1-AP; 1:1000), GART (ProteinTech; #13659-1-AP; 1:1000), SHMT2 (ProteinTech; #10726-1-AP; 1:1000). Fluorescence-conjugated secondary antibodies Alexa Fluor™ Plus 800 goat anti-rabbit IgG (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #A32735; 1:10,000); Alexa Fluor™ Plus 800 goat anti-mouse IgG (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #A32730; 1:10,000); Alexa Fluor™ 680 goat anti-mouse IgG (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #A21058; 1:10,000) and Alexa Fluor™ Plus 680 goat anti-rabbit IgG (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #A32734; 1:10,000) were used for signal detection with Odyssey CLx Imaging System (LI-COR Biosciences).
About 10 μg per chromatome sample was processed using an adapted single-pot solid-phase-enhanced sample preparation (SP3) methodology67. Briefly, equal volumes (125 l containing 6250 µg) of two different kinds of paramagnetic carboxylate modified particles (SpeedBeads #45152105050250 and #65152105050250; GE Healthcare) were mixed, washed three times with 250 µl water and reconstituted to a final concentration of 50 μg/μL with LC-MS grade water (LiChrosolv; MERCK KgaA). Samples were filled up to 100 µL with stock solutions to reach a final concentration of 2% SDS, 100 mM HEPES, pH 8.0.Proteins were reduced by incubation with 10 mM DTT for 1 h at 56 °C. After cooling down to RT, reduced cysteines were alkylated with iodoacetamide at a final concentration of 55 mM for 30 min in the dark. For tryptic digestion, 400 μg of mixed beads were added to reduced and alkylated samples, vortexed gently and incubated for 5 min at RT. The formed particles-protein complexes were precipitated by addition of acetonitrile to a final concentration of 70% [V/V], mixed briefly via pipetting before incubating for 18 min at RT. Particles were then immobilized using a magnetic rack (DynaMag-2 Magnet; Thermo Fisher Scientific) and the supernatant was discarded. SDS was removed by washing two times with 200 μL 70% ethanol and one time with 180 μL 100% acetonitrile. After removal of organic solvent, particles were resuspended in 100 μL of 50 mM NH4HCO3, followed by digestion overnight through incubation with 1 1 μg of Trypsin at 37 °C. Samples were acidified to a final concentration of 1% trifluoroacetic acid (Uvasol; MERCK KgaA) prior to immobilizing the beads on the magnetic rack. Peptides were desalted using C18 solid-phase extraction spin columns (Pierce Biotechnology, Rockford, IL). Finally, eluates were dried in a vacuum concentrator and reconstituted in 10 µl of 0.1% TFA.
Mass spectrometry was performed on an Orbitrap Fusion Lumos mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, San Jose, CA) coupled to an Dionex Ultimate 3000RSLC nano system (Thermo Fisher Scientific, San Jose, CA) via nanoflex source interface. Tryptic peptides were loaded onto a trap column (Pepmap 100 5 μm, 5 × 0.3 mm, Thermo Fisher Scientific, San Jose, CA) at a flow rate of 10 μL/min using 0.1% TFA as loading buffer. After loading, the trap column was switched in-line with a 50 cm, 75 µm inner diameter analytical column (packed in-house with ReproSil-Pur 120 C18-AQ, 3 μm, Dr. Maisch, Ammerbuch-Entringen, Germany). Mobile-phase A consisted of 0.4% formic acid in water and mobile-phase B of 0.4% formic acid in a mix of 90% acetonitrile and 10% water. The flow rate was set to 230 nL/min and a 90 min gradient used (4 to 24% solvent B within 82 min, 24 to 36% solvent B within 8 min and, 36 to 100% solvent B within 1 min, 100% solvent B for 6 min before bringing back solvent B at 4% within 1 min and equilibrating for 18 min). Analysis was performed using a data-independent acquisition (DIA) mode. Full MS scans were acquired with a mass range of 375–1250 m/z in the orbitrap, a RF lens set at 40%, and at a resolution of 120,000 (200 m/z). The automatic gain control (AGC) was set to a target of 4 × 105, and a maximum injection time of 54 ms was applied, scanning data in profile mode. MS1 scans were followed by 41 MS2 customed windows. The MS2 scans were acquired in the Orbitrap at a resolution of 30,000 (at 200 m/z), with an AGC set to target 2 × 105, for a maximum injection time of 54 ms. Fragmentation was achieved with higher energy collision induced dissociation (HCD) at a fixed normalized collision energy (NCE) of 35%. A single lock mass at m/z 445.12002468 was employed. Xcalibur version 4.3.73.11 and Tune 3.4.3072.18 were used to operate the instrument. The mass spectrometry data has been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository69 with the dataset identifier PXD047504.
Chromatin data were analyzed using DIA-NN software70 which were subsequently normalized using the normalize_vsn and median_normalisation functions from the DEP71 and proDA72 packages, respectively73. The rest of the pipeline was followed according to the DEP package, with the inclusion of impute.mi function for protein-imputation from the imp4p package74. Relative enrichment of each sample was estimated as the average relative abundances of known nuclear proteins in each sample75. These were then used to perform a robust linear regression correction of detected protein intensity across samples against their respective nuclear enrichment, in order to remove any effect that might arise from differential chromatin enrichment, using the rlm function76,77. Known subcellular localizations for proteins were obtained from the pRoloc R package hyperLOPITU2OS201878. FDX1 protein abundance across subcellular compartments was also derived from the same source, with its subcellular profile compared against marker proteins belonging to either mitochondria or chromatin subcellular compartments.
Protein complex membership was obtained from HuMAP.235,41.Here, protein complexes were filtered to contain at least 20 subunits in the “core chromatome” data. Next, they were arranged using the ggraph R package (https://ggraph.data-imaginist.com), with the “dh” layout option. For a more accurate and curated set of mitochondrial complexes, which was used to separate between OXPHOS complexes, we utilized the annotation provided by MitoCarta3.079. ANOVA comparison between OXPHOS proteins across cancer lineages were performed using the aov R function (http://www.R-project.org/) and all PCA analysis was performed using the prcomp function from the same resource. Annotation of proteins according to the metabolic KEGG pathway they participate in was done using the MetaboSignal resource80.
Comparison to other chromatome extraction protocols was performed by categorizing the proteins annotated as “chromatin proteins” by each study, as having or not a nuclear main localization on HPA. Subsequently, to demonstrate that even “core chromatome” proteins that do not have a main nuclear localization annotated on HPA, may still have a protein pool on chromatin, we classified them based on their physical interaction with at least one exclusively nuclear protein in OpenCell34.
For the comparison of relative protein abundances of OXPHOS proteins to their respective expression in whole-cell extract, proteomics and transcriptomics in the matching cancer cell lines, we used the protein abundances from dataset: Table_S2_Protein_Quant_Normalized.xlsx81 and transcripts expression levels from DepMap82 (dataset: CCLE_RNAseq_rsem_genes_tpm_20180929.txt).
Analysis was facilitated by the tidyverse83 and data.table84 collection of packages with the protein determined as differentially expressed in cancer samples compared to non-cancerous samples by averaging the normalized abundances of the two populations and calculating the difference between them. The most extreme differences (1%) across all lineages combined were considered significant. Prediction of nuclear localization signals was performed on the input fasta file using PredictNLS30. Evolutionary ages of proteins were derived from Gene-Ages85, while annotation of enzymes, as epigenetic, was obtained from Epifactors37. Heatmaps for relative chromatin abundance and protein detection were produced using the pheatmap R package with default settings (https://github.com/raivokolde/pheatmap).
Supporting immunofluorescence images for proteins across various cancer cell lines were obtained from the image library of the HPA40, while Protein covariation partners were obtained from ProteomeHD48.
For ionizing radiation-induced DNA damage experiments, HeLa cells were seeded in 96-well plates and incubated for 48 hours to allow stabilization of cell cycle progression. Cells were then exposed to 10 Gy of ionizing radiation and subsequently incubated for 0-, 8-, or 24-h post-irradiation. Non-irradiated control plates were maintained under the same incubation conditions. Following the specified incubation periods, cells were fixed with 4% formaldehyde (final concentration) for 10 min at RT.
Immunofluorescence experiments were performed by seeding cells (MDA-MB-231, MDA-MB-468, Hcc44, H460 for OXPHOS experiments and HeLa for DNA damage experiments) into transparent, flat-bottom 96- or 384-well plates (Revvity; #6055302, #6057302) and incubating them for at least 48 h prior to fixation. Cells were fixed by adding 37% formaldehyde (Sigma-Aldrich; # 252549) directly to the culture medium to achieve a final concentration of 4%, followed by incubation for 10 min at RT. After fixation, cells were washed three times with 1× PBS, then permeabilized with 0.2% Triton X-100 in 1× PBS for 20 min.
Blocking was carried out using 5% bovine serum albumin (BSA) in 1× PBS for 40 min. Cells were then incubated with primary antibodies for 2.5 h, followed by one wash with 0.05% Tween-20 in 1× PBS and two washes with 1× PBS. Secondary antibodies were applied for 45 min, followed by the same washing procedure. Finally, nuclear DNA was stained by incubating with Hoechst 33342 (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #H3570) diluted in 1× PBS for 10 min at RT.
The following primary antibodies were used: BRCA1 (Cell Signalling, #50799); CYC1 (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #PA5-72170; 1:200), COX4 (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #PA5-19471; 1:200), ATP5A1 (Thermo, 43-9700, 1:100), MTHFD1 (ProteinTech; #10794-1-AP; 1:400), ATIC (ProteinTech; #11099-1-AP; 1:400), GART (ProteinTech; #13659-1-AP; 1:50), IMPDH2 (Abcam; #ab131158; 1:200), and γH2AX (Merck; #05-636; 1:500). The following secondary antibodies were used: Alexa Fluor 488 donkey anti-rabbit (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #A21206; 1:1000), Alexa Fluor 647 goat anti-rabbit (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #A21244; 1:1000) and Alexa Fluor 633 goat anti-mouse (Thermo Fisher Scientific; #A21050; 1:1000).
Immunofluorescent images were acquired using the Operetta High-Content Screening System (PerkinElmer) with a 63× objective in confocal mode. Image analysis was performed using Harmony software (version 4.9), and quantitative data were further processed using the R programming environment (version 4.4).
To determine cell cycle phase distribution based on Hoechst staining, we used the Operetta High-Content Imager and Harmony software, following a strategy adapted from previously published methods46,47. Briefly, the Hoechst signal was measured using an excitation filter of 355–385 nm and an emission filter of 430–500 nm. Nuclei were segmented using the Find Nuclei building block, and those intersecting image borders were excluded using the Select Population tool with the Remove Border Objects option. Nuclear roundness and area were quantified using the Calculate Morphology Properties function. Poorly segmented or low-quality nuclei were identified by visual inspection and excluded based on roundness and size thresholds applied via the Select Population tool. To measure the background signal, an 8-pixel-wide ring region surrounding each nucleus was defined using the Select Cell Region building block. The extracted data were exported as a tab-separated values (TSV) file and analyzed using a custom R script. A histogram of nuclear mean Hoechst intensity was generated with the ggplot286 package, with intensity values plotted along the X-axis. The histogram was visually inspected to identify characteristic G1 and G2 peaks, and corresponding Hoechst intensity thresholds were defined. These thresholds were used to classify nuclei into cell cycle phases using the mutate function from the dplyr package.
Commercially available breast (Tissue Array LLC; BR725) and lung (Tissue Array LLC; LC992a) cancer TMAs were used to assess the nuclear localization of metabolic enzymes. Slides were baked at 60 °C for 1 h, then deparaffinized in xylene and rehydrated through a graded ethanol series (10, 9, and 70%) followed by a final rinse in distilled water. Antigen retrieval was performed by immersing slides in citrate buffer (Vector Lab, H-330o-250) and heating at 95–98 °C for 20 min using a pressure cooker. After cooling to RT, slides were washed in 1x PBS. Blocking was performed in 5% BSA in 1x PBS for 1 h at RT. TMAs were incubated overnight at 4 °C with primary antibodies against selected OXPHOS subunits (COX4 (Thermo; #PA5-19471, 1:100), ATP5A1 (Thermo; #43-9700, 1:100), NDUFV1 (Thermo; #PA5-67373, 1:100) 1% BSA in PBS. After PBS washes, slides were incubated for 1 h at RT with fluorophore-conjugated secondary antibodies (Alexa Fluor 555 (Thermo; #A-21429, 1:200, Alexa Fluor 555 (Thermo; #A-21424, 1:200) diluted in 1% BSA in PBS. After PBS washes, slides were mounted using Fluoromount-G with DAPI (Invitrogen; #00-4959-52). Slides were imaged on a high-content imaging system (PerkinElmer Operetta) in confocal mode with acquisition of multiple z-planes per spot (9 planes, 2 µm intervals). Segmentation, nuclear intensity quantification, and epithelial/stromal classification were performed using Harmony software and downstream R-based pipelines as described.
For quantitative analysis of the immunofluorescence images, segmentation and cell classification were performed in Harmony software (v4.9). Nuclei were segmented, and cells were classified based on manually gated parameters for each slide, including nucleus area, DAPI intensity, and width-to-length ratio. Segmentation and classification data were exported for downstream processing in R. Cells were assigned to TMA cores using kernel density estimation and peak detection of cell coordinates, with adaptive filtering to exclude outliers and edge artifacts. For each field of view, the optimal z-plane was determined by maximizing the “SER Edge” nuclear edge contrast metric to select the best-focused plane. Additional quality control included filtering based on nucleus area, width, length, DAPI intensity, image sharpness, and core-wise quantile outlier removal. Single-cell data were integrated with TMA vendor metadata to map each nucleus to its respective core, tissue type, and marker. Marker intensities were log2-transformed and rescaled, and composite groupings (tissue, type, grade) were incorporated for stratified analysis. Statistical comparisons of normalized marker intensities between tissue types, histological grades, and compartments (epithelial vs. stromal) were performed using Wilcoxon tests with Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons.
Samples were prepared as described previously27. Briefly, total RNA was extracted on day 4 from WT (IMPDH2 KO reconstituted with IMPDH2-WT), KO (IMPDH2 KO), KO + G (IMPDH2 KO with 400 µM guanosine), NES (IMPDH2 KO reconstituted with IMPDH2-NES), and NLS (IMPDH2 KO reconstituted with IMPDH2-NLS) using the PureLink RNA Mini Kit (Thermo Fisher, #12183018 A). From 500 ng input, poly(A) + RNA was isolated by two rounds of oligo-dT capture, fragmented at elevated temperature, and reverse-transcribed with random hexamers (SuperScript II). Second-strand synthesis incorporated dUTP to preserve strandedness, followed by A-tailing, ligation of TruSeq adapters with unique dual indexes, and limited-cycle PCR (TruSeq Stranded mRNA Library Prep, Illumina #20020595). Libraries were purified with AMPure XP beads, QC'd by Bioanalyzer DNA1000 or Fragment Analyzer, quantified by qPCR (KAPA KK4835) and sequenced 1 * 51 + 10 + 10 bp on Illumina's NextSeq2000.
RNA-sequencing data were processed as described previously27. Briefly, 51-bp single-end reads were quality-filtered (>20), and adapter sequences were trimmed using TrimGalore (v0.6.10). Transcript quantification was performed with Salmon (v1.10.0) using a decoy-aware index of the Homo sapiens hg19 reference genome (k-mer = 19) and summarized to the gene level with the tximport package. Differential expression analysis between each condition and WT (three biological replicates per group) was conducted in R using Deseq287 with log₂ fold-change shrinkage implemented via apeglm88. Gene annotation was performed using EnsDb.Hsapiens.v86. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) of principal component–derived gene rankings employed fgsea with gene sets retrieved from msigdbr. GO terms associated with PC1 were clustered using rrvgo, and pathway activity scores were computed using GSVA89.
Further information on research design is available in the Nature Portfolio Reporting Summary linked to this article.
Proteomics data were available at PRIDE under the project identifier PXD047504 https://www.ebi.ac.uk/pride/archive/projects/PXD047504. The Source data generated in this study are provided in the Source Data file as well as in the Zenodo repository under identifier 17349179 https://zenodo.org/records/17349179. Code availability at https://github.com/SdelciLab/Chromatome with a permanent record available through Zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo.17610559 at https://zenodo.org/records/17610560. Source data are provided with this paper.
De Berardinis, R. J. & Chandel, N. S. Fundamentals of cancer metabolism. Sci. Adv. 2, e1600200 (2016).
Flavahan, W. A., Gaskell, E. & Bernstein, B. E. Epigenetic plasticity and the hallmarks of cancer. Science 357, eaal2380 (2017).
Pavlova, N. N. & Thompson, C. B. The emerging hallmarks of cancer metabolism. Cell Metab. 23, 27 (2016).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Gapa, L., Alfardus, H. & Fischle, W. Unconventional metabolites in chromatin regulation. Biosci. Rep. 42, BSR20211558 (2022).
Kinnaird, A., Zhao, S., Wellen, K. E. & Michelakis, E. D. Metabolic control of epigenetics in cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 16, 694–707 (2016).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Lu, C. & Thompson, C. B. Metabolic regulation of epigenetics. Cell Metab. 16, 9 (2012).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Wong, C. C., Qian, Y. & Yu, J. Interplay between epigenetics and metabolism in oncogenesis: mechanisms and therapeutic approaches. Oncogene 36, 3359–3374 (2017).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Muhar, M. et al. SLAM-seq defines direct gene-regulatory functions of the BRD4-MYC axis. Science 360, 800–805 (2018).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Yan, H. et al. IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in gliomas. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 765 (2009).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Gupta, M. N. & Uversky, V. N. Moonlighting enzymes: when cellular context defines specificity. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 80, 1–23 (2023).
Article
Google Scholar
Jeffery, C. The use of proteomics studies in identifying moonlighting proteins. Methods Mol. Biol. 1871, 437–443 (2019).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Pardo-Lorente, N. & Sdelci, S. MTHFD2 in healthy and cancer cells: canonical and non-canonical functions. NPJ Metab. Health Dis. 2, 3 (2024).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Lin, J.-M. G. et al. Metabolic modulation of transcription: the role of one-carbon metabolism. Cell Chem. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chembiol.2022.11.009 (2022).
Sirover, M. A. The role of posttranslational modification in moonlighting glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase structure and function. Amino Acids 53, 507–515 (2021).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Shi, M. et al. GAPDH facilitates homologous recombination repair by stabilizing RAD51 in an HDAC1-dependent manner. EMBO Rep. 24, e56437 (2023).
Grolla, A. A. et al. A nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase–GAPDH interaction sustains the stress-induced NMN/NAD+ salvage pathway in the nucleus. J. Biol. Chem. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.RA119.010571(2020).
Bian, X. et al. Regulation of gene expression by glycolytic and gluconeogenic enzymes. Trends Cell Biol. 32, 786–799 (2022).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Sivanand, S. et al. Nuclear acetyl-CoA production by ACLY promotes homologous recombination. Mol. Cell 67, 252–265.e6 (2017).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Linder, S. J. & Mostoslavsky, R. Put your mark where your damage is: acetyl-CoA production by ACLY promotes DNA repair. Mol. Cell 67, 165–167 (2017).
Dai, M. et al. Nuclear-translocation of ACLY induced by obesity-related factors enhances pyrimidine metabolism through regulating histone acetylation in endometrial cancer. Cancer Lett. 513, 36–49 (2021).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Willnow, P. & Teleman, A. A. Nuclear position and local acetyl-CoA production regulate chromatin state. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07471-4 (2024).
Li, X. et al. Nucleus-translocated ACSS2 promotes gene transcription for lysosomal biogenesis and autophagy. Mol. Cell 66, 684–697.e9 (2017).
Article
ADS
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Bulusu, V. et al. Acetate recapturing by nuclear acetyl-CoA synthetase 2 prevents loss of histone acetylation during oxygen and serum limitation. Cell Rep. 18, 647 (2017).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Wright, R. H. G. et al. ADP-ribose-derived nuclear ATP synthesis by NUDIX5 is required for chromatin remodeling. Science 352, 1221–1225 (2016).
Article
ADS
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Pardo-Lorente, N. et al. Nuclear localization of MTHFD2 is required for correct mitosis progression. Nat. Commun. 15, 9529 (2024).
Article
ADS
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Moretton, A. et al. A metabolic map of the DNA damage response identifies PRDX1 in the control of nuclear ROS scavenging and aspartate availability. Mol. Syst. Biol. 19, e11267 (2023).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Espinar, L. et al. Nuclear IMPDH2 controls the DNA damage response by modulating PARP1 activity. Nat. Commun. 15, 9515 (2024).
Article
ADS
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Geladaki, A. et al. Combining LOPIT with differential ultracentrifugation for high-resolution spatial proteomics. Nat. Commun. 10, 331 (2019).
Article
ADS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Mulvey, C. M. et al. Using hyperLOPIT to perform high-resolution mapping of the spatial proteome. Nat. Protocols 12, 1110–1135 (2017).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Cokol, M., Nair, R. & Rost, B. Finding nuclear localization signals. EMBO Rep. 1, 411–415 (2000).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Dutta, B., Yan, R., Lim, S. K., Tam, J. P. & Sze, S. K. Quantitative profiling of chromatome dynamics reveals a novel role for HP1BP3 in hypoxia-induced oncogenesis. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 13, 3236–3249 (2014).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Aranda, S. et al. Chromatin capture links the metabolic enzyme AHCY to stem cell proliferation. Sci. Adv. 5, eaav2448–eaav2448 (2019).
Article
ADS
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Rafiee, M.-R. et al. Chromatin-contact atlas reveals disorder-mediated protein interactions and moonlighting chromatin-associated RBPs. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, 13092–13107 (2021).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Cho, N. H. et al. OpenCell: endogenous tagging for the cartography of human cellular organization. Science 375, eabi6983 (2022).
Drew, K., Wallingford, J. B. & Marcotte, E. M. hu.MAP 2.0: integration of over 15,000 proteomic experiments builds a global compendium of human multiprotein assemblies. Mol. Syst. Biol. 17, e10016 (2021).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Huttlin, E. L. et al. Architecture of the human interactome defines protein communities and disease networks. Nature 545, 505–509 (2017).
Article
ADS
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Medvedeva, Y. A. et al. EpiFactors: a comprehensive database of human epigenetic factors and complexes. Database 2015, bav067 (2015).
Kanehisa, M. & Goto, S. KEGG: Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 27 (2000).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Kanehisa, M., Furumichi, M., Sato, Y., Kawashima, M. & Ishiguro-Watanabe, M. KEGG for taxonomy-based analysis of pathways and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 51, D587 (2023).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Thul, P. J. et al. A subcellular map of the human proteome. Science 356, eaal3321 (2017).
Fischer, S. N. et al. hu.MAP3.0: atlas of human protein complexes by integration of >25,000 proteomic experiments. Mol. Syst. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44320-025-00121-5 (2025).
Bano, D. et al. Alteration of the nuclear pore complex in Ca2+-mediated cell death. Cell Death Differ. 17, 119–133 (2010).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Wang, R. & Brattain, M. G. The maximal size of protein to diffuse through the nuclear pore is larger than 60kDa. FEBS Lett. 581, 3164–3170 (2007).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Ebong, I., Beilsten-Edmands, V., Patel, N. A., Morgner, N. & Robinson, C. V. The interchange of immunophilins leads to parallel pathways and different intermediates in the assembly of Hsp90 glucocorticoid receptor complexes. Cell Discov. 2, 16002 (2016).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Camps, J., Erdos, M. R. & Ried, T. The role of lamin B1 for the maintenance of nuclear structure and function. Nucleus 6, 8–14 (2015).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Roukos, V., Pegoraro, G., Voss, T. C. & Misteli, T. Cell cycle staging of individual cells by fluorescence microscopy. Nat. Protoc. 10, 334–348 (2015).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Massey, A. J. Multiparametric cell cycle analysis using the operetta high-content imager and harmony software with PhenoLOGIC. PLoS ONE 10, e0134306 (2015).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Kustatscher, G. et al. Co-regulation map of the human proteome enables identification of protein functions. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 1361 (2019).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Reddy, B. A. et al. Nucleotide biosynthetic enzyme GMP synthase is a TRIM21-controlled relay of p53 stabilization. Mol. Cell 53, 458–470 (2014).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Shi, M. et al. GAPDH facilitates homologous recombination repair by stabilizing RAD51 in an HDAC1 -dependent manner. EMBO Rep. 24, e56437 (2023).
Juda, P., Šmigová, J., Kováčik, L., Bártová, E. & Raška, I. Ultrastructure of cytoplasmic and nuclear inosine-5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase 2 “rods and rings” inclusions. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 62, 739–750 (2014).
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Liu, F. et al. CRL4-DCAF8L1 regulates BRCA1 and BARD1 protein stability. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 18, 1434–1450 (2022).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Deng, J. et al. CRL4-DCAF8L2 E3 ligase promotes ubiquitination and degradation of BARD1. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 611, 107–113 (2022).
Article
ADS
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Mok, M. T. S. & Henderson, B. R. A comparison of BRCA1 nuclear localization with 14 DNA damage response proteins and domains: Identification of specific differences between BRCA1 and 53BP1 at DNA damage-induced foci. Cell Signal 22, 47–56 (2010).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Scully, R. et al. Dynamic changes of BRCA1 subnuclear location and phosphorylation state are initiated by DNA damage. Cell 90, 425–435 (1997).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Huang, C. et al. Phosphoproteomic characterization of the signaling network resulting from activation of the chemokine receptor CCR2. J. Biol. Chem. 295, 6518–6531 (2020).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Brummer, G. et al. Chemokine signaling facilitates early-stage breast cancer survival and invasion through fibroblast-dependent mechanisms. Mol. Cancer Res. 16, 296–308 (2018).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Li, S. et al. MCP-1-induced ERK/GSK-3β/Snail signaling facilitates the epithelial–mesenchymal transition and promotes the migration of MCF-7 human breast carcinoma cells. Cell Mol. Immunol. 14, 621–630 (2017).
Article
ADS
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Fang, W. B. et al. CCL2/CCR2 chemokine signaling coordinates survival and motility of breast cancer cells through Smad3 protein- and p42/44 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)-dependent mechanisms. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 36593–36608 (2012).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Kozhevnikova, E. N. et al. Metabolic enzyme IMPDH is also a transcription factor regulated by cellular state. Mol. Cell 47, 133–139 (2012).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Xu, C. et al. Nuclear cytoophidia assembly represses transcriptional activity to control skeletal development and homeostasis. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.12.10.571026 (2023).
Sdelci, S. et al. MTHFD1 interaction with BRD4 links folate metabolism to transcriptional regulation. Nat. Genet. 51, 990–998 (2019).
An, S., Kumar, R., Sheets, E. D. & Benkovic, S. J. Reversible compartmentalization of de novo purine biosynthetic complexes in living cells. Science 320, 103–106 (2008).
Article
ADS
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Sabnis, R. in Handbook of Fluorescent Dyes and Probes Ch. 55 (John Wiley & Sons 2015).
Schindelin, J. et al. Fiji: an open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 676–682 (2012).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Schneider, C. A., Rasband, W. S. & Eliceiri, K. W. NIH image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat. Methods 9, 671–675 (2012).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Hughes, C. S. et al. Ultrasensitive proteome analysis using paramagnetic bead technology. Mol. Syst. Biol. 10, 757 (2014).
Olsen, J. V. et al. Parts per million mass accuracy on an Orbitrap mass spectrometer via lock mass injection into a C-trap. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 4, 2010–2021 (2005).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Perez-Riverol, Y. et al. The PRIDE database and related tools and resources in 2019: improving support for quantification data. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D442 (2019).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Demichev, V., Messner, C. B., Vernardis, S. I., Lilley, K. S. & Ralser, M. DIA-NN: neural networks and interference correction enable deep proteome coverage in high throughput. Nat. Methods 17, 41 (2020).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Zhang, X. et al. Proteome-wide identification of ubiquitin interactions using UbIA-MS. Nat. Protoc. 13, 530–550 (2018).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Ahlmann-Eltze, C. proDA: differential abundance analysis of label-free mass spectrometry data. https://github.com/const-ae/proDA (2022).
R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. https://www.R-project.org/ (2022).
Gianetto, Q. G. imp4p: imputation for proteomics. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=imp4p (2021).
Orre, L. M. et al. SubCellBarCode: proteome-wide mapping of protein localization and relocalization. Mol. Cell 73, 166–182.e7 (2019).
Article
PubMed
CAS
Google Scholar
Venables, W. N. & Ripley, B. D. Modern Applied Statistics with S (Springer, 2002).
Wu, T. et al. clusterProfiler 4.0: a universal enrichment tool for interpreting omics data. Innovation 2, 100141 (2021).
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Gatto, L., Breckels, L. M., Mulvey, C. M. & Lilley, K. S. A Bioconductor workflow for processing and analysing spatial proteomics data. F1000Res. 5, 2926 (2018). 2926.
Article
Google Scholar
Rath, S. et al. MitoCarta3.0: an updated mitochondrial proteome now with sub-organelle localization and pathway annotations. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, D1541–D1547 (2021).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Martinez, A. et al. MetaboSignal: a network-based approach for topological analysis of metabotype regulation via metabolic and signaling pathways. Bioinformatics 33, 773–775 (2017).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Nusinow, D. P. et al. Quantitative proteomics of the cancer cell line encyclopedia. Cell 180, 387–402.e16 (2020).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Ghandi, M. et al. Next-generation characterization of the cancer cell line encyclopedia. Nature 569, 503–508 (2019).
Article
ADS
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Wickham, H. et al. Welcome to the tidyverse. J. Open. Source Softw. 4, 1686 (2019).
Article
ADS
Google Scholar
Dowle, M. & Srinivasan, A. data.table: extension of ‘data.frame‘. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=data.table (2022).
Liebeskind, B. J., Mcwhite, C. D. & Marcotte, E. M. Towards consensus gene ages. Genome Biol. Evol. 8, 1812–1823 (2016).
Wickham, H. Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2016).
Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15, 550 (2014).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Zhu, A., Ibrahim, J. G. & Love, M. I. Heavy-tailed prior distributions for sequence count data: removing the noise and preserving large differences. Bioinformatics 35, 2084–2092 (2019).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Hänzelmann, S., Castelo, R. & Guinney, J. GSVA: gene set variation analysis for microarray and RNA-Seq data. BMC Bioinformatics 14, 7 (2013).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Mi, H. et al. PANTHER version 16: a revised family classification, tree-based classification tool, enhancer regions and extensive API. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, D394–D403 (2021).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
CAS
Google Scholar
Kourtis, S. et al. Native chromatome profiling reveals hundreds of metabolic enzymes in the nucleus across tissues. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17610559 (2025).
Article
Google Scholar
Download references
We acknowledge support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation through the Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa (CEX2020-001049-S, MCIN/AEI /10.13039/501100011033), and the Generalitat de Catalunya through the CERCA program and to the EMBL partnership. A.S. acknowledges financial support of a fellowship from the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Doctoral Network NUCLEAR (grant agreement no. 101166838). M.P. acknowledges financial support of a fellowship from the “la Caixa” Foundation (ID 100010434). The fellowship code is LCF/BQ/DI23/11990062. S.S. acknowledges financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation through the Plan Nacional (grant agreement no. PID2022-141740NB-I00), the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (grant agreement no. 852343). R.G. acknowledges financial support of a Severo Ochoa predoctoral fellowship. N.P.L. acknowledges financial support of a fellowship from the Boehringer Foundation. We thank Queralt Tolosa Ramon for creating the illustrations for OXPHOS complexes in Fig. 2, which are subject to a CC BY-NC-SA (Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike) 4.0 International license.
S. Kourtis
Present address: Centre for Cell Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH9 3BF, UK
R. Ghose
Present address: Breast Cancer Now Toby Robins Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer, Research, London, UK
These authors contributed equally: S. Kourtis, A. Gañez Zapater.
Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Dr. Aiguader 88, Barcelona, 08003, Spain
S. Kourtis, A. Gañez Zapater, CR Elbæk, A. Schmidt, R. Ghose, A. Coll Manzano, L. Espinar Calvo, M. Guirola, N. Pardo-Lorente, M. Garcia-Cao, M. Pfeiffer & S. Sdelci
Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain
A. Schmidt, M. Pfeiffer & S. Sdelci
EPCC – University of Edinburgh (UoE), Edinburgh, Scotland, UK
S. Haynes
CeMM Research Center for Molecular Medicine of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria
F. Fontaine & A. Müller
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
S.K. and S.S. designed the study and wrote the manuscript. S.K. performed proteomics data analysis. G.-C.M. and P.-L.N. optimized the chromatin extraction protocol by defining sample-specific conditions for each cell type. G.R. conducted immunofluorescence validation for all samples. G.-C.M. performed Western blot validation across samples. G.Z.A. contributed to the optimization of the chromatome protocol, prepared samples for mass spectrometry, and carried out validation experiments and data analysis for the high-throughput immunofluorescence in both cell lines and TMAs. E.C.R. analyzed TMA datasets. C.M.A. performed immunofluorescence staining of OXPHOS proteins in cell lines and TMAs. S.A. performed the analysis of the RNA-seq experiment. P.M. contributed to the analysis of OXPHOS subunits in cell lines. E.C.L. performed Western blot validation of differential chromatin recruitment of enzymes across cell lines, produced the IMPDH2 KO cell line and performed mRNA extraction for the RNA-seq experiment. H.S. contributed to mass spectrometry data analysis. F.F. and M.A. performed mass spectrometry acquisition. S.S. acquired funding and supervised the study. S.K., S.S., G.Z.A., E.C.R., S.A., and C.M.A. contributed to data representation.
Correspondence to
S. Sdelci.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Nature Communications thanks the anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. A peer review file is available.
Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
Kourtis, S., Gañez Zapater, A., Elbæk, C. et al. Native chromatome profiling reveals hundreds of metabolic enzymes in the nucleus across tissues.
Nat Commun 17, 1655 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-69217-2
Download citation
Received: 11 July 2024
Accepted: 27 January 2026
Published: 06 March 2026
Version of record: 06 March 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-69217-2
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Advertisement
Nature Communications
(Nat Commun)
ISSN 2041-1723 (online)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited
Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.
Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Nature Cell Biology
(2026)Cite this article
Pattern recognition receptor (PRR)-induced interferon (IFN) is critical for effective immunity. The PRRs Toll-like receptor (TLR) 3, TLR4 and cyclic GMP–AMP synthase (cGAS), together with the stimulator of IFN genes (STING), signal through TANK-binding kinase 1 (TBK1), which activates the type-I/III IFN-inducing transcription factor interferon-response factor 3 (IRF3). The mechanism by which these PRRs activate TBK1 remains unresolved. Here we show that lysine-11 (K11)-linked ubiquitination drives TBK1 activation by these PRRs. The E3 ligase ANKIB1 attaches K11-linked ubiquitin chains to components of the TLR3- and cGAS–STING-induced signalosomes. This facilitates Optineurin recruitment to these complexes, in turn enabling recruitment and activation of TBK1 and IRF3, defining an uncharacterized signalling axis. In mice, ANKIB1 deficiency dampens IFN induction via TLR3 and cGAS–STING, reducing interferonopathy and compromising protection against HSV-1, respectively. Together, our results demonstrate an unanticipated and critical role for ANKIB1-generated K11-linked ubiquitination in the immune response activated by cGAS–STING, TLR3 and TLR4.
Interferon (IFN) production is a key defence mechanism of innate immunity. Different pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) detect distinct pathogen- and damage-associated molecular patterns during infection and during tissue damage, rapidly mobilizing innate defences1,2,3. Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are archetypal and well-characterized PRRs4. The triggering of two of them, TLR3 and TLR4, results in the activation of TANK-binding kinase 1 (TBK1) in a biochemical context capable of directly activating IRF3, the transcription factor responsible for the induction of type-I and type-III IFNs5. This unique biochemical feature of the double-stranded (ds)RNA-sensing TLR3 and the lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-sensing TLR4 is shared with a small subset of other PRRs, most notably the cytosolic DNA sensor cyclic GMP–AMP synthase (cGAS) and the two dsRNA-sensing RNA helicases retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I) and melanoma differentiation-associated protein 5 (MDA-5)6,7,8,9. However, despite its critical role in innate immunity, the biochemical mechanism by which activation of these PRRs confers this capacity on TBK1 remains unknown.
TBK1 is also involved in other cellular processes, including inhibition of tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-induced cell death via RIPK1 phosphorylation10. We previously showed that, by enabling the recruitment of various kinases, linear ubiquitin (linUb) chains generated by HOIP, a component of the linUb chain assembly complex (LUBAC), are responsible for full gene activation and cell-death resistance in TNFR1 and TLR3 signalling11,12,13. While TBK1 is one such kinase in TNF signalling10, in TLR3 signalling LUBAC-generated linUb is dispensable for TBK1 activation13.
This unexpected observation, together with the fact that all proposed TBK1-recruiting adaptors in TLR3 signalling bind to polyubiquitin, including linUb10,14, led us to hypothesize that another, possibly linUb-generating and therefore probably HOIP-related E3 ligase may be required for TLR3-induced TBK1 activation. On the basis of this, we next screened the HOIP-comprising RING-between-RING (RBR)-domain-containing E3 subfamily for the elusive E3 ligase.
This resulted in the discovery of ANKIB1 as the E3 ligase responsible for TBK1 activation downstream of TLR3. Yet ANKIB1 does not generate linUb chains but instead attaches K11-linked ubiquitin (K11-Ub) chains to various components of the TLR3 signalosome, thereby enabling Optineurin (OPTN) recruitment and initiating an ANKIB1–K11-Ub–OPTN–TBK1–IRF3 signalling axis that bridges TLR3 stimulation to IRF3 activation and IFN induction. Remarkably, this signalling axis also drives activation of IRF3 following stimulation of TLR4 and cGAS, together with the stimulator of IFN genes (STING). In vivo, ANKIB1 deficiency limits TLR3-induced IFN induction and, consequently, reduces lethality in a TLR3-driven interferonopathy model, whereas it increases vulnerability of mice to herpes simplex virus-1 (HSV-1) infection, known to depend on cGAS–STING-mediated IFN induction for survival, providing compelling evidence that ANKIB1-mediated K11 ubiquitination is crucial for innate immune signalling in vivo.
After confirming that HOIP and its linUb-generating activity were dispensable for TBK1 activation downstream of TLR3, but not TNFR1 (Fig. 1a), we screened the RBR-E3 subfamily for the E3 ligase responsible for TLR3-induced TBK1 activation. Candidate RBR-E3s we could exclude a priori were HOIP, HOIL-115 and PARKIN because it is not expressed by HeLa cells16. Individual RNA-interference (RNAi)-mediated silencing of the remaining 11 RBR-E3 members revealed that only suppression of ANKIB1 substantially reduced TLR3-induced TBK1 activation, but not p65 phosphorylation (Extended Data Fig. 1a–c), implying a specific role for ANKIB1 in activation of TBK1 and not NF-κB.
a,b, HeLa WT, HOIP-deficient (HOIP−/−) and HOIP−/− cells reconstituted with enzymatically inactive HOIPC885S (a) or ANKIB1-deficient (ANK−/−) (b) cells stimulated with either 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) or 100 ng ml−1 TNF for the indicated times and the lysates were analysed by western blotting. c, HT-29 ANK−/− and WT cells were stimulated with 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for the indicated times and the lysates were analysed by immunoblotting. d,e, IFNβ (d) and IFNλ (e) mRNAs levels were assessed by RT–qPCR 6 h after stimulation of HT-29 with 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C). P = 0.0199 and P < 0.0001, respectively. f, HeLa ANK−/− cells were reconstituted (rec.) with either moTAP-ANKIB1 WT (ANK WT) or empty vector (empty vec.) and treated with 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for the indicated times. Lysates were analysed by western blotting. g, Total RNA was isolated for IFNβ transcripts analysis by RT–qPCR after the stimulation of cells from f for the respective time points. P = 0.4470, P = 0.3506, P < 0.0001, P = 0.0018 and P = 0.0099, respectively. h, RNA-sequencing analysis of HeLa cells reconstituted with either ANK WT or empty vector was performed after 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) treatment for 2 h (n = 2). i, HeLa cells stably expressing ANK WT were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) and ANKIB1 was pulled down via its Flag-tag. j, HeLa TLR3−/− cells reconstituted with moTAP-TLR3 were treated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) as indicated. moTAP-TLR3 was pulled down through its Flag-tag. FL, full length. All graphs represent mean ± s.e.m. of three independent experiments. P values were calculated by two-way ANOVA with uncorrected Fisher's LSD multiple-comparisons tests with 95% confidence intervals. ∗P ≤ 0.05, ∗∗P ≤ 0.01 and ∗∗∗P ≤ 0.001. For western blots, one representative of at least three independent experiments is displayed. Non-specific bands are marked with an asterisk.
Source data
To test whether ANKIB1 could indeed be the hitherto elusive E3 ligase required for TLR3-induced TBK1 activation, we next generated ANKIB1-knockout (KO) cell lines and analysed their response to TNF and polyinosinic:polycytidylic acid (poly(I:C)) stimulation in comparison to HOIP-KO and wild-type (WT) cells. This demonstrated that TLR3-induced TBK1 activation was virtually abolished in ANKIB1-KO cells, whereas TNF-induced TBK1 activation remained intact (Fig. 1b). Conversely, HOIP-KO impaired TNF- but not poly(I:C)-induced TBK1 activation (Fig. 1b). Extended kinetic analyses across different KO and WT cell lines confirmed that ANKIB1-KO did not merely delay but profoundly impaired TLR3- but not TNF-induced TBK1 phosphorylation (Extended Data Fig. 2a–c). Thus, TBK1 phosphorylation is enabled by two distinct RBR-E3 ligases in different signalling pathways; whereas HOIP facilitates TNF-induced TBK1 activation, ANKIB1 is required for TLR3-induced TBK1 phosphorylation.
Assessing the role of ANKIB1 in TLR3-mediated IRF3 activation and IFN induction17,18 revealed that TLR3-induced IRF3 phosphorylation and the induction of both β (type-I) and λ (type-III) IFN gene expression almost completely depended on ANKIB1 (Fig. 1c–e). Stably re-expressing modified tandem affinity purification-tagged (moTAP)-ANKIB1 at near endogenous levels in ANKIB1-KO cells fully restored TLR3-induced TBK1 and IRF3 phosphorylation (Fig. 1f and Extended Data Fig. 2d) and type-I IFN production (Fig. 1g), underscoring the crucial role of ANKIB1 in this pathway. RNA-sequencing analysis demonstrated that ANKIB1 is required for TLR3-mediated induction of type-I/III IFN genes and downstream IFN-stimulated genes. (Fig. 1h).
To epistatically place ANKIB1 in TLR3 signalling, we performed immunoprecipitation (IP) of moTAP-ANKIB1, which corroborated the TLR3-induced interaction of ANKIB1 with phosphorylated TBK1 (p-TBK1; Fig. 1i). To determine whether this interaction occurs at the TLR3 signalling complex (TLR3-SC) level, we generated TLR3-deficient HeLa cells expressing ectopic moTAP-TLR3. Apart from confirming recruitment of the known TLR3-SC components RIPK1 and HOIP13,19, immunoprecipitation of moTAP-TLR3 also revealed ANKIB1 as forming part of the TLR3-SC but not the TNFR1-SC (Fig. 1j and Extended Data Fig. 2e). Thus, ANKIB1 constitutes a previously unrecognized component of the TLR3-SC that interacts with TBK1 upon receptor activation and is required for TLR3-induced activation of TBK1 and IRF3 and induction of type-I/III IFNs.
Although ANKIB1 is a member of the RBR-E3 subfamily20, its catalytic activity had not previously been demonstrated. In an in vitro ubiquitination assay, full-length recombinant ANKIB1 was capable of generating ubiquitin chains in the presence of the E2s UBE2L3 and UBE2D3, with higher activity observed with UBE2D3 (Fig. 2a), yet not with UBE2L6 (Extended Data Fig. 3a). The multimeric proteins formed by ANKIB1/UBE2D3 were degraded by the general deubiquitinase (DUB) USP2, confirming they were composed of ubiquitin polymers (Extended Data Fig. 3b).
a, moTAP-ANKIB1 purified from HeLa cells was incubated with ubiquitin, E1, E2 UBE2D3 or UBE2L3 in ubiquitin buffer for 1 h at 37 °C and samples were analysed by western blotting. b, HeLa ANK−/− cells reconstituted (rec.) with either moTAP-ANKIB1 WT (ANK WT) or ΔRBR (ANK ΔRBR) mutant were stimulated with 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) as indicated. c, HeLa cells stably expressing either ANK WT or ANK ΔRBR were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) as indicated and ANKIB1 was pulled down via its Flag-tag. d, HeLa ANK−/− cells reconstituted with either ANK WT or RING1-mutant C333A/ I335A/ C336A/ C351A/ H353A (ANK RING1mut) were stimulated with 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) as indicated. The downstream pathways were analysed by immunoblotting. e, After performing an in vitro ubiquitination assay of ANKIB1 in combination with either UBE2D3 or UBE2L3, the samples were digested with trypsin overnight and subjected to LC–MS/MS analysis. Left: the intensity induced upon in vitro ubiquitin assay. Representative figure from two independent experiment. Right: pie charts representing the intensity average of two independent experiments of the different ubiquitin linkages generated by ANKIB1 in combination with either UBE2D3 or UBE2L3. f, moTAP-ANKIB1 purified from HeLa cells was incubated with ubiquitin, E1, E2 UBE2D3 in ATP regeneration solution for 1 h at 37 °C followed by digestion of the sample with deubiquitinase Cezanne for 1 h at 30 °C. g, HeLa cells stably expressing either ANK WT or moTAP-ANKIB1 ΔUIM (ANK ΔUIM) were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) and ANKIB1 was pulled down via its Flag-tag. h, HT-29 cells reconstituted (rec.) with either moTAP-ANKIB1 WT or empty vector (empty vec.) were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) and ANKIB1 was pulled down via its Flag-tag. The samples were subjected to analysis by western blotting. For all western blots, one representative of at least three independent experiments is displayed.
Source data
To assess whether the E3 ligase activity of ANKIB1 is required for TBK1 activation, we employed a similar approach to the previously studied RBR-E3 ligases, all known to exert their catalytic activity via their respective RING221. We therefore next generated ANKIB1 with mutations in the conserved cysteine residues (C519S/C522S/C532S/C537S/C540S/C545S/C548S) of its RING2 (ANKIB1-RING2mut) (Extended Data Fig. 3c). Unexpectedly, ANKIB1-RING2mut expression in ANKIB1-deficient cells restored TLR3-induced TBK1 and IRF3 phosphorylation (Extended Data Fig. 3d). As we suspected that the point mutations we introduced in the RING2 of ANKIB1 might not have aborted its activity to the same extent as was seen in previous studies for other RBR-E3s22,23,24, we next expressed an ANKIB1 mutant lacking the entire RING2 domain (ANKIB1∆RING2) (Extended Data Fig. 3c), yet TBK1 and IRF3 activation were again restored to levels comparable to those observed in wt cells upon TLR3 stimulation (Extended Data Fig. 3e). To test whether ANKIB1∆RING2 bears residual catalytic activity, we performed in vitro ubiquitination assays. Despite lacking a RING2, this mutant RBR-E3 retained ubiquitin chain-forming activity with the more general E2 UBE2D3 but not with UBE2L3 (Extended Data Fig. 3f).
To fully abrogate any possible RBR-residing catalytic activity of ANKIB1, we next expressed mutant ANKIB1 lacking the entire RBR (ANKIB1∆RBR) in ANKIB1-KO cells (Extended Data Fig. 3c). This mutant failed to rescue TBK1 and IRF3 phosphorylation upon TLR3 activation, indicating that the catalytic activity of ANKIB1 indeed resides in its RBR and that the polyubiquitin chains it generates are essential for TBK1 activation (Fig. 2b). We next investigated whether the RBR domain is required for the recruitment of ANKIB1 to the TLR3-SC and/or its interaction with TBK1. Pull down (PD) revealed that the interaction of ANKIB1 with p-TBK1 was drastically reduced in absence of its RBR (Fig. 2c). By contrast, full-length ANKIB1 and ANKIB1∆RBR exhibited comparable interaction with TRAF3, a known component of the TLR3-SC25,26,27. Thus, the RBR of ANKIB1 is required for its TLR3-induced interaction with TBK1 and TBK1 activation but not for TLR3-SC recruitment.
Since the ANKIB1-RBR but not its RING2 was required, we next generated ANKIB1-deficient cells expressing a RING1-mutant ANKIB1 (ANKIB1-RING1mut) with mutations in several conserved residues (C333A/I335A/C336A/C351A/H353A) and, indeed, TLR3 stimulation failed to activate TBK1 in these cells (Fig. 2d). Hence, the RING1 of ANKIB1 is required and sufficient for its catalytic function and essential for promoting TBK1 activation.
Using mass spectrometry, we next determined the ubiquitin linkage type(s) ANKIB1 generates in the presence of UBE2D3 or UBE2L3. Surprisingly, K11-Ub was the most abundant linkage type formed by ANKIB1 in these in vitro assays with K63-Ub and K6-Ub linkages also detectable, albeit at substantially lower levels (Fig. 2e). No other linkage types, including linUb (M1-Ub) and K48-Ub, were detected. Performing a DUB assay using Cezanne (OTUD7B)28, a K11-Ub-specific DUB, resulted in the disappearance of the vast majority of ANKIB1-generated polyubiquitin chains (Fig. 2f). Thus, ANKIB1 preferentially generates K11-Ub chains and its catalytic activity facilitates TLR3-induced TBK1 activation, suggesting that ANKIB1-generated K11-Ub may be crucial for TBK1 recruitment and activation upon TLR3 stimulation.
Binding to ubiquitin or polyubiquitin chains is a well-established mechanism for recruiting proteins with the required specificity to signalling complexes29,30. As the ANKIB1-RBR was not required for TLR3-SC recruitment, we next examined the role of ANKIB1's ubiquitin-interacting motif (UIM), a domain type previously reported to mediate polyubiquitin-chain binding (Extended Data Fig. 3c)31. Following poly(I:C) treatment, while wt-ANKIB1 interacted with known TLR3-SC components, including TRAF3 and HOIP, UIM-deficient ANKIB1 (ANKIB1∆UIM) failed to associate with these components, implying this domain is essential for TLR3-SC recruitment of ANKIB1 (Fig. 2g).
As TBK1 is recruited to different immune receptor signalling complexes via distinct ubiquitin-binding adaptor proteins, we next sought to identify which ANKIB1-interacting protein(s) might function as TBK1 recruiter(s) in the TLR3 pathway. OPTN was previously reported as adaptor for TBK1 in TLR3 and TLR4, but not in TNFR1 signalling10,32, whereas NAP1 was previously proposed to serve as adaptor for TBK1 in TLR3 and TNFR1 signalling10,33. To determine possible adaptor interactions, we performed ANKIB1 PD upon TLR3 stimulation followed by western blotting for these the different possible adaptors. This identified a selective interaction between ANKIB1 and OPTN but not NAP1 (Fig. 2g,h). Hence, ANKIB1 is recruited to the TLR3-SC via its UIM domain and, once recruited, utilizes its RBR domain to mediate TBK1 activation, probably via OPTN as adaptor.
Recruitment of OPTN, along with recruitment and activation of TBK1, correlates with the presence of ANKIB1 at the TLR3-SC (Fig. 2g,h). However, other proteins, including TANK, NAP1 and SINTBAD, have also been proposed as adaptors for TBK1 in TLR3 signalling34,35,36. To assess the contribution of these adaptors to TBK1 activation by TLR3, we next investigated poly(I:C)-induced TBK1 activation in triple knockout (TKO) cells lacking these three adaptors. Remarkably, TLR3-induced activation of TBK1 and IRF3 was unaffected in these cells whereas, consistent with our prior observations10, TNF-induced TBK1 activation was completely lost in the absence of these three proteins (Fig. 3a). Owing to the association between OPTN and ANKIB1 at the TLR3-SC and prior evidence implicating OPTN as TBK1 adaptor in TLR3 signalling32,37,38, we next generated quadruple knockout (QKO) cells lacking TANK, NAP1, SINTBAD and OPTN. In these QKO cells, TBK1 phosphorylation was completely abolished (Fig. 3b) upon poly(I:C) stimulation, indicating a critical role for OPTN as an adaptor in TBK1 recruitment. To test whether OPTN alone is sufficient and essential for TBK1 activation, we next generated OPTN single-KO cells. Strikingly, loss of OPTN alone recapitulated the phenotype of ANKIB1-deficient or QKO cells, with complete impairment of TBK1 and IRF3 activation in response to stimulation of TLR3 but not TNFR1 (Fig. 3c). Together, these results establish OPTN as the essential adaptor for TBK1 activation in TLR3 signalling.
a, HeLa WT cells and cells deficient for TANK/NAP1/SINTBAD (TKO) were stimulated with either 100 ng ml−1 TNF or 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for the indicated times and the lysates were subjected to western blot analysis. b, HeLa WT cells and cells deficient for TANK/NAP1/SINTBAD/OPTN (QKO) were stimulated with 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for the indicated times and the lysates were subjected to western blot analysis c, HeLa WT, Optineurin-deficient (OPTN−/−) and ANK−/− cells were stimulated with either 100 ng ml−1 TNF or 10 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for the indicated times. The lysates were analysed by immunoblotting. d, HeLa ANKIB1-proficient and deficient moTAP-TLR3 cells were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C). moTAP-TLR3 was pulled down via its Flag-tag and the analysis of co-immunoprecipitated proteins was determined by immunoblotting. FL, full length. e, HeLa moTAP-TLR3 cells were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for the indicated time points. moTAP-TLR3 was pulled down via its Flag-tag. After washing, the pulled-down samples were incubated with or without Cezanne (Cez) in DUB buffer for 1 h at 30 °C. Co-immunoprecipitated proteins and the resultant supernatant were subjected to western blotting analysis. One representative of at least three independent experiments is displayed. Non-specific bands are marked with an asterisk.
Source data
Since the catalytic activity of ANKIB1 is required to promote TLR3-induced TBK1 activation (Fig. 2d) and because previous studies have implicated the UBAN domain of OPTN in TBK1 recruitment during TLR3 signalling32,39, we next tested whether ANKIB1 and its K11-Ub-generating activity are necessary for OPTN and TBK1 recruitment. A comparison of TLR3-SC formation in WT versus ANKIB1-KO cells revealed markedly reduced recruitment of p-TBK1 and OPTN in ANKIB1 deficiency (Fig. 3d).
To investigate whether its K11-Ub-generating capacity is also required, we purified the TLR3-SC, treated it with the K11-specific DUB Cezanne and analysed the resulting supernatant for proteins released from the complex. Strikingly, Cezanne-mediated hydrolysis of K11-Ub chains caused specific release of OPTN, but not NEMO, from the TLR3-SC (Fig. 3e). Hence, ANKIB1 and its K11-Ub-generating activity are essential for the recruitment of OPTN, which is, in turn, required for TBK1 activation upon TLR3 stimulation.
In summary, we define a signalling axis in which ANKIB1 is recruited to the TLR3-SC, where it catalyses the formation of K11-linked polyubiquitin chains, facilitating the recruitment of OPTN which, in turn, mediates the recruitment and activation of TBK1. Importantly, this previously unrecognized ANKIB1–K11-Ub–OPTN–TBK1 signalling axis is essential for TLR3-induced IRF3 activation and IFN production.
We next investigated whether ANKIB1 plays a role in other PRRs known to induce type-I IFNs through TBK1 and IRF3. We first focused on the LPS-sensing TLR4, the only TLR capable of signalling through two pathways via distinct adaptors, a TRIF-dependent one that is similar to TLR3 signalling and an MyD88-dependent one. Importantly, only TRIF—but not MyD88— contains an IRF3-binding motif, which is essential for its recruitment, activation and subsequent induction of IFN genes9,25,40. In ANKIB1-KO cells, LPS-induced IRF3 phosphorylation and type-I/III IFN induction were substantially reduced in comparison with WT cells. TBK1 phosphorylation, however, was only partially decreased (Fig. 4a–c). Thus, similar to TLR3 signalling, the TRIF-dependent arm of TLR4 signalling requires ANKIB1 for effective TBK1 activation and downstream IRF3-dependent IFN induction. By contrast, MyD88-dependent signalling can also activate TBK1 but does not require ANKIB140.
a, HT-29 WT and ANK−/− cells were treated with 10 µg ml−1 LPS as indicated and subjected to western blot analysis. b,c, IFNβ (b) and IFNλ (c) mRNAs were measured by RT–qPCR 6 h after stimulation of HT-29 with 10 µg ml−1 LPS. P = 0.0043 and P = 0.0051, respectively. d, HeLa WT and ANK−/− cells were treated with 10 µg ml−1 2′3′cGAMP as indicated and subjected to western blot analysis. e,f, IFNβ (e) and IFNλ (f) mRNAs were respectively measured by RT–qPCR 6 h after stimulation of HT-29 with 10 µg ml−1 ADU-S100. P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0108, respectively. g, HeLa WT and ANK−/− cells were infected with attenuated MVA virus for the indicated time points before IFNβ transcripts were measured by RT–qPCR. P = 0.0004 and P < 0.0001, respectively. hpi, hours post infection. h, HeLa cells stably expressing ANK WT or ANK RING1mut were stimulated with 10 µg ml−1 ADU-S100 and the lysates were analysed by immunoblotting. i, HeLa cells stably expressing either ANK WT or ANK ΔUIM treated with 10 µg ml−1 2′3′cGAMP. moTAP-ANKIB1 was pulled down via its Flag-tag. Immunoprecipitated proteins were analysed by immunoblotting. j, A549 WT and ANK−/− cells were treated with 500 ng ml−1 3p-hpRNA for the indicated times and subjected to western blot analysis. k,l, IFNβ (k) and IFNλ (l) mRNAs were measured by RT–qPCR 6 h after stimulation of HeLa WT and ANK−/− cells with 500 ng ml−1 3p-hpRNA. P = 0.8597 and P = 0.9458, respectively. m, A549 WT and ANK−/− cells were infected with SeV for the indicated times before IFNβ transcripts were measured by RT–qPCR. P = 0.4326 and P = 0.7257, respectively. n, HeLa WT, OPTN−/− and ANK−/− cells were stimulated with 10 µg ml−1 ADU-S100. The lysates were subjected to immunoblotting. o, HeLa WT and TKO cells were treated with 500 ng ml−1 3p-hpRNA for the indicated times and the lysates were subjected to western blot analysis. All graphs represent mean ± s.e.m. of three independent experiments. P values were determined by two-way ANOVA with uncorrected Fisher's LSD multiple-comparisons tests with 95% confidence interval. ∗P ≤ 0.05, ∗∗P ≤ 0.01 and ∗∗∗P ≤ 0.001. For western blots, one representative of three independent experiments is shown. Non-specific bands are marked with an asterisk.
Source data
We next investigated the role of ANKIB1 in cGAS–STING signalling, which also relies on TBK1 and IRF3 for IFN induction. In ANKIB1-KO cells, stimulation with the STING activator 2′3′cyclic GMP–AMP (2′3′cGAMP) or the STING agonist ADU-S100 failed to induce robust phosphorylation of TBK1, IRF3 and STING (Fig. 4d and Extended Data Fig. 4a,b). Following STING activation, ANKIB1 PD revealed an interaction with activated STING, together with p-TBK1, suggesting that ANKIB1 is recruited to the STING-associated signalling complex (STING-SC) (Extended Data Fig. 4c). ANKIB1-deficient cells exhibited significantly reduced type-I/III IFN induction, not only following STING agonist treatment but also after infection with the cGAS-sensed poxvirus modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) (Fig. 4e–g). Hence, ANKIB1 is also crucial for effective type-I/III IFN induction in TLR4 and cGAS–STING signalling.
Using cells expressing ANKIB1-RING1mut and ANKIB1ΔUIM, we next tested the role of ANKIB1 catalytic activity and ubiquitin-binding capacity in cGAS–STING signalling. Both mutants failed to rescue TBK1 and IRF3 phosphorylation following STING stimulation, indicating that the E3 ligase activity and UIM of ANKIB1 are also essential for its function in cGAS–STING signalling (Fig. 4h and Extended Data Fig. 4d). Furthermore, ANKIB1 required its UIM for recruitment to the STING-SC, where it interacted with phosphorylated STING, TBK1 and OPTN (Fig. 4i).
By treating cells with the RIG-I ligand 3p-hpRNA, we next assessed whether the RIG-I helicase, which recognizes cytosolic dsRNA and activates IFN transcription through mitochondrial antiviral signalling protein (MAVS)-driven activation of TBK1 and IRF341, may also require ANKIB1 for TBK1 activation. However, ANKIB1-KO cells exhibited TBK1 and IRF3 activation and type-I/III IFN induction similar to WT controls (Fig. 4j–l), regardless of the 3p-hpRNA concentration used (Extended Data Fig. 4e,f). As further confirmation, we infected cells with Sendai virus (SeV) or influenza A virus (IAV), both of which are primarily sensed by RIG-I42. Upon infection, WT and ANKIB1-KO cells showed similar levels of TBK1 and IRF3 phosphorylation and MAVS protein levels remained unchanged (Extended Data Fig. 4g). Moreover, IFNβ induction was similar in WT and ANKIB1-KO cells (Fig. 4m). These findings suggest that ANKIB1 may not have a prominent role for RIG-I-mediated activation of TBK1 and IRF3 and subsequent IFN production.
To explain the divergence in ANKIB1 requirement across different PRRs, we hypothesized that distinct PRRs may engage different adaptor proteins for TBK1 recruitment and activation. Supporting this, we found that, as in TLR3 signalling, the absence of OPTN strongly impaired STING-induced activation of TBK1 and IRF3, whereas co-deletion of TANK, NAP1 and SINTBAD did not (Fig. 4n and Extended Data Fig. 4h). Conversely, TBK1 and IRF3 phosphorylation were strongly impaired in TANK/NAP1/SINTBAD TKO but remained unchanged in OPTN-KO cells upon RIG-I activation (Fig. 4o and Extended Data Fig. 4i). Thus, ANKIB1 promotes IFN production downstream of PRRs that depend on OPTN for TBK1 and IRF3 activation, namely TLR3, TRIF-mediated TLR4, and cGAS–STING. Instead, activation of TBK1, IRF3 and IFN production induced by stimulation of RIG-I is primarily mediated via TANK, NAP1 and/or SINTBAD.
Having established that the catalytic activity of ANKIB1 is essential for TBK1 activation downstream of TLR3 and cGAS–STING, we aimed to identify its potential substrates within the TLR3- and STING-SCs. To this end, we performed total ubiquitin PDs using tandem ubiquitin-binding entities (TUBE) following poly(I:C) or 2′3′cGAMP treatment. In WT cells, the adaptor proteins TRIF and STING were strongly ubiquitinated upon stimulation, whereas their ubiquitination was considerably reduced in ANKIB1-KO and ANKIB1-RING1mut-expressing cells (Fig. 5a,b). In addition, ubiquitination of NEMO and OPTN was also impaired in the absence of ANKIB1 or its catalytic activity (Fig. 5a,b), showing that the activity of ANKIB1 facilitates their ubiquitination. Intriguingly, ANKIB1 itself appeared to be constitutively ubiquitinated and underwent additional ubiquitination upon poly(I:C) or STING agonist treatment, while these ubiquitination events were absent in ANKIB1-RING1mut-expressing cells, (Fig. 5a,b), implying constitutive and PRR stimulation-dependent ANKIB1 auto-ubiquitination.
a, HeLa WT, ANK−/− and ANK RING1mut cells were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for the indicated times. The ubiquitinated proteins were pulled down using GST-TUBE pre-coupled with glutathione beads. Co-precipitated proteins were analysed by western blot. b, HeLa WT, ANK−/− and ANK RING1mut cells were stimulated with 10 µg ml−1 2′3′cGAMP for the indicated times. The ubiquitinated proteins were pulled down using GST-TUBE pre-coupled with glutathione beads. Co-precipitated proteins were analysed by western blot. c, HeLa WT cells were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for 60 min. The ubiquitinated proteins were pulled down using GST-TUBE pre-coupled with glutathione beads and the beads were incubated with K48 tetra-Ub chains before performing a deubiquitination assay using either 125 nM AMSH, Cezanne (Cez.) or 250 nM USP2. The samples were analysed by western blot. d, HeLa WT, and ANK−/− cells were stimulated with 15 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for the indicated times. K11-linked polyubiquitinated targets were co-precipitated using a K11 2A3/2E6 antibody pre-coupled with protein G. Co-immunoprecipitated proteins were analysed by western blotting. IP, immunoprecipitated. For western blots, one representative of three independent experiments is displayed. Non-specific bands are marked with an asterisk.
Source data
To identify the nature of the ubiquitin linkages involved, we performed TUBE PDs from poly(I:C)-treated cells followed by DUB assay using K63-specific AMSH, K11-specific Cezanne and non-linkage-specific USP228,43,44. TRIF ubiquitination was sensitive to both AMSH and Cezanne, indicating the presence of both K63- and K11-Ub-linked chains (Fig. 5c). OPTN ubiquitination was predominantly reduced by AMSH and USP2, with a modest Cezanne effect, suggesting predominant K63-Ub of OPTN yet also the presence of K11-Ub. For NEMO, only the high-molecular-weight ubiquitin chains were cleaved by either DUB (Fig. 5c), suggesting the presence of complex, probably K63–K11-branched or mixed–linkage ubiquitin chains that resist complete processing by individual DUBs. By performing K11-Ub-specific PDs following TLR3 activation, TRIF was found to be K11-ubiquitinated in WT but not in ANKIB1-KO cells, providing further proof of TRIF as substrate of ANKIB1 (Fig. 5d). Together, these results identify TRIF, STING, NEMO, OPTN and ANKIB1 itself as targets of the K11-Ub chain-generating activity of ANKIB1. K11-Ub, placed on components of the TLR3- and STING-SCs enables OPTN recruitment, thereby promoting activation of TBK1, IRF3 and subsequent IFN induction.
To understand the relevance of ANKIB1 in primary cells and in vivo, we generated Ankib1−/− mice. ANKIB1 deficiency was not embryonically lethal and did not result in any overt phenotype (Extended Data Fig. 5a). However, ANKIB1 is differentially expressed across tissues and particularly enriched in the spleen, lungs and, to a lesser extent, the colon and Peyer's patches (Extended Data Fig. 5b). To assess whether ANKIB1 deletion altered basal immune homeostasis or inflammation, we evaluated spleen morphology and immune cell composition. Both spleen/body weight ratio and immune cell numbers were comparable between control and Ankib1−/− mice (Extended Data Fig. 5c,d). Histological characterization of liver, spleen, lungs and intestine did not show any prominent alterations between Ankib1−/− and control mice (Extended Data Fig. 5e).
We next assessed the role of ANKIB1 in innate immune signalling by examining primary murine immune cells ex vivo. Consistent with our findings in human cell lines, stimulation of TLR3 led to substantially decreased TBK1 phosphorylation in bone marrow-derived macrophages (BMDMs) from Ankib1−/− compared with Ankib1+/− controls (Extended Data Fig. 5f). In TLR4-stimulated splenocytes, TBK1 phosphorylation was preserved—probably via MyD88-dependent signalling—yet IRF3 phosphorylation was abolished and STAT1 phosphorylation, a downstream readout of type-I IFN signalling, was largely diminished in Ankib1−/− cells (Extended Data Fig. 5g). Similarly, STING stimulation induced robust TBK1 activation and IFN production in Ankib1+/− primary murine immune cells but was substantially attenuated in Ankib1−/− cells (Extended Data Fig. 5h). By contrast, RIG-I signalling remained intact in Ankib1−/− cells, with comparable phosphorylation of TBK1, IRF3 and STAT1 to controls (Extended Data Fig. 5i). These observations were further confirmed by cytokine quantification: control BMDMs secreted high levels of IFNβ upon TLR3, TLR4 or STING stimulation, whereas Ankib1−/− BMDMs showed blunted IFNβ production upon TLR3 and TLR4 stimulation and a substantial decrease therein upon STING activation (Fig. 6a–c). By contrast, IFNβ production in response to RIG-I stimulation was unaffected by ANKIB1 deficiency (Fig. 6d). These results demonstrate that ANKIB1 is a crucial driver of IRF3 activation and consequent IFN induction downstream of TLR3, TLR4 and cGAS–STING.
a–d, Control (ctrl) and Ankib1−/− BMDMs were stimulated with 5 µg ml−1 poly(I:C) for 24 h (a), 200 ng ml−1 LPS for 4 h (b), 5 µg ml−1 ADU-S100 for 6 h (c) or 200 ng ml−1 3p-hpRNA for 6 h (d) and the supernatants were collected to determine IFNβ concentration by ELISA. The graphs represent mean ± s.e.m. of three or four independent biological replicates. P values were determined by two-way ANOVA with uncorrected Fisher's LSD multiple-comparisons tests with 95% confidence intervals. P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001, P < 0.0001 and P = 0.6573, respectively. e, A workflow of the sHLH model. f, Poly(I:C) (10 mg kg−1) was injected intraperitoneally to 8–12-week-old WT littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice, followed 24 h later by intraperitoneal administration of 5 mg kg−1 LPS. The survival rates of the mice were monitored for 5 days and a log-rank Mantel–Cox test was used to determine the statistical significance. P = 0.0018. hpi, hours post-injection. g, Spleens of 9–10-week-old WT littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice were collected for RNA extraction after 10 mg kg−1 intraperitoneal poly(I:C) injection for 3 and 6 h. The RNA-sequencing analysis is represented as a heat map, using two independent biological replicates per group for each genotype. h, IFNα response gene set enrichment analysis was performed using spleen samples for both the 3-h and the 6-h time points. Statistical significance of the data was determined using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. i, WT littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice were challenged with 2 × 10⁸ colony-forming units Escherichia coli-induced sepsis. The survival rates of the mice were monitored for 5 days and a log-rank Mantel–Cox test was used to determine the statistical significance. P = 0.9001. j, Eight to ten-week-old WT littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice were challenged with 1 × 106 p.f.u. IAV. The weight loss of the mice was monitored for 15 days. Data show the mean ± s.d. of independent biological replicates. P values were determined by two-way ANOVA. P = 0.2721. dpi, days post-infection. k, Twelve to sixteen-week-old male Ankib1−/− (n = 5) and WT littermate control mice (n = 8) were challenged with 1 × 106 PFU HSV-1 SC16. The survival rates of the mice were monitored for 14 days and a log-rank Mantel–Cox test was used to determine the statistical significance. P = 0.0395. l, GO analysis was performed using RNA samples from the brainstem of WT littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice at 3 days post infection (dpi) with HSV-1. m,n, The respective cytokines in lung homogenates of 12-week-old WT littermate control (n = 4) and Ankib1−/− (n = 5) mice were measured at day 5 post infection with HSV-1 SC16 by multiplex ELISA. P = 0.007 and P = 0.0209, respectively. ELISA graphs represent mean ± s.d. of independent biological replicates. P values were determined by an unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test. ∗P ≤ 0.05, ∗∗P ≤ 0.01, ∗∗∗P ≤ 0.001 and ∗∗∗P ≤ 0.0001 o, GO analysis was performed using RNA samples from brainstems of WT littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice at 5 dpi with HSV-1. Panel e created with BioRender.com.
During infection, type-I IFNs are critical for orchestrating an effective immune response45,46. However, excessive or uncontrolled type-I IFN production can be detrimental, as seen in various so-called interferonopathies47, such as Aicardi–Goutières syndrome and STING-associated vasculopathy with onset in infancy, as well as secondary haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (sHLH)47,48,49,50,51,52. The latter is characterized by excessive macrophage activation, leading to hyperinflammation and multi-organ failure53. As no natural pathogen is known to elicit IFN exclusively through TLR3, we employed an in vivo model of sHLH (Fig. 6e) in which TLR3-driven type-I IFN converts an otherwise sublethal TLR4 stimulation (Extended Data Fig. 6a) into a lethal challenge47. Strikingly, ANKIB1 deficiency significantly protected from TLR3-driven sHLH, as 78% of Ankib1−/− mice survived whereas all control mice succumbed to the challenge (Fig. 6f). RNA-sequencing of spleens collected after poly(I:C) treatment revealed that, while poly(I:C) induced robust type-I/III IFN expression in control mice, this response was largely absent in Ankib1−/− mice (Fig. 6g). Importantly, while NF-κB target genes such as IL-6 and IL-1β were equally induced in both genotypes, IFN-stimulated genes were selectively upregulated in controls. Gene set enrichment analysis further showed a marked suppression of IFNα and IFNγ response signatures in Ankib1−/− mice, whereas TNF, IL-6 and MAPK signalling pathways were not strongly affected (Fig. 6h and Extended Data Fig. 6b–e). Together, these results establish ANKIB1 as a key driver of TLR3-induced type-I/III IFN production and responses in vivo, and identify it as a critical mediator of TLR3-induced lethality in interferonopathy.
Given the established role of ANKIB1 in TRIF- but not MyD88-dependent TLR4 signalling, we next determined whether ANKIB1 deficiency influences TLR4-driven, MyD88-dependent pathology in vivo. To accomplish this, we employed an E. coli-induced sepsis model in which the lethality is driven by MyD88-dependent TLR4 signalling54. Notably, ANKIB1-deficient and control mice exhibited comparable susceptibility to E. coli-induced lethality (Fig. 6i), indicating selective requirement for ANKIB1 in TRIF-dependent, but not MyD88-dependent, TLR4 signalling in vivo.
We next assessed the role of ANKIB1 in the context of viral infection. First, we used IAV as an RNA virus model, in which viral RNA is known to be primarily sensed by RIG-I, leading to a potent IFN response essential for host survival45,55,56. In this model, weight loss and recovery were indistinguishable between control and Ankib1−/− mice (Fig. 6j), providing in vivo confirmation that ANKIB1 is not essential for RIG-I signalling.
Finally, we intranasally infected mice with HSV-1 SC16, a DNA virus primarily sensed by the cGAS–STING pathway whose induction of IFN is indispensable for survival in this model57,58,59. As expected, 75% of control mice survived infection (Fig. 6k). Remarkably, Ankib1−/− mice exhibited severe susceptibility, with only 20% of the mice surviving the challenge (Fig. 6k), implicating ANKIB1 as a key regulator of antiviral defence against HSV-1. Interestingly, the susceptibility of Ankib1−/− mice to HSV-1 infection is similar to that previously reported for Optn−/− mice in the same model60, which, in both cases, is lower than expected for complete loss of cGAS–STING signalling59. This result is probably reflective of a substantial, yet incomplete dependence of cGAS–STING-induced IFN induction on ANKIB1–OPTN signalling also in vivo, in line with our observations in human cell lines (Fig. 4n) and primary murine immune cells ex vivo (Fig. 6c and Extended Data Fig. 5h).
To determine the mechanism underlying this increased lethality, we collected brainstems—the primary site of HSV-1 replication in this model59 at day 3 post infection and analysed cytokine expression. Notably, IFNβ response signalling was significantly downregulated in HSV-1-infected Ankib1−/− compared with control mice (Fig. 6l). However, NF-κB target genes showed heterogeneous expression, indicating that ANKIB1 primarily affected IFN signalling. We also observed a 50% reduction in IFNβ levels in pulmonary tissues from infected mice, while NF-κB-driven cytokines such as IL-6 remained largely unchanged (Fig. 6m and Extended Data Fig. 6f). Consequently, immune activation and cytotoxic effector responses were also impaired, as evidenced by reduced granzyme B expression in the lungs and the analysis of the downregulated genes in the brainstems of Ankib1−/− mice (Fig. 6n,o). Thus, ANKIB1 is an important driver of cGAS–STING-dependent IFN induction and antiviral immunity against HSV-1 infection in vivo.
In summary, the results demonstrate that ANKIB1 is crucial for IFN-dependent biological effects triggered by TLR3 and cGAS–STING in vivo, whereas this is not the case for RIG-I and the MyD88-dependent arm of TLR4.
We here describe ANKIB1 and the product of this catalytic activity, K11-Ub, as previously unknown crucial drivers of TBK1 and IRF3 activation and type-I/III IFN induction downstream of TLR3, TLR4 and cGAS–STING. This is achieved via a hitherto unknown signalling axis comprised of ANKIB1–K11-Ub–OPTN–TBK1, which acts as a molecular bridge linking activation of TLR3, TLR4, and cGAS–STING to TBK1 activation, thereby enabling IRF3 activation and IFN induction. We provide evidence for the physiological relevance of ANKIB1 as the apical component of a previously unrecognized signalling axis in in vivo disease models of TLR3-dependent interferonopathy and cGAS–STING-mediated, IFN induction-dependent antiviral immunity.
Mechanistically, ANKIB1 is recruited to the TLR3-SC via its UIM domain, where it K11-ubiquitinates TRIF, NEMO, OPTN and itself. K11-Ub was previously shown to regulate cell cycle progression by enabling proteasomal degradation61, with more recent studies suggesting that, rather than acting alone, K11-Ub triggers proteasomal degradation in concert with other chain types, including K48-Ub or K63-Ub62 with non-degradative signalling roles63. We show that ANKIB1-generated K11-Ub is essential for the recruitment of OPTN to the TLR3-SC, which in turn serves as critical adaptor for TBK1 recruitment and activation, driving IRF3 phosphorylation and IFN production. Interestingly, Dynek et al. reported that K11-Ub confers a scaffold property to RIPK1 in TNFR1 signalling and that NEMO, which contains a UBAN domain similar to that of OPTN, is able to bind to such K11-Ub64.
We also identified a role for ANKIB1 in TRIF-dependent TLR4 signalling. TLR4 signals via both MyD88 and TRIF65,66, with TRIF containing the IRF3-binding motif for IFN production9,40. While TANK mediates TBK1 and IKKε activation in MyD88 signalling34, it is dispensable for TBK1 and IRF3 activation downstream of TRIF. Our findings align with prior studies showing that OPTN—but not TANK—is essential for IFN production in TRIF-dependent TLR4 signalling32,37. On the basis of our findings, we propose that the ANKIB1–K11-Ub–OPTN–TBK1 signalling axis we identified as responsible for IFN induction downstream of TRIF in TLR3 signalling operates likewise in TLR4 signalling.
Finally, we demonstrated a key role for ANKIB1 in cGAS–STING signalling. Prior studies reported a direct TBK1–STING interaction via a C-terminal TBK1-binding motif7,67, whereas others highlighted a requirement for ubiquitination68,69,70. Our results reconcile these models by showing that the ANKIB1–OPTN dependence of cGAS–STING-induced TBK1 activation and IFN induction is substantial yet incomplete. It is possible that ANKIB1–OPTN-independent, cGAS–STING-induced TBK1 activation is due to direct binding of TBK1 to STING, as previously shown7,67; it remains to be shown, however, whether this is truly the case.
Consistent with previous work that OPTN deficiency impairs STING-induced IFN induction, thereby increasing susceptibility to HSV-1 infection60,71, we show that OPTN is required for effective TBK1 activation downstream of STING. We identify STING, NEMO, OPTN and ANKIB1 itself as substrates of ANKIB1 and show, by using ANKIB1-RING1mut cells, that the catalytic activity of ANKIB1 enables OPTN and TBK1 recruitment, contributing substantially to IRF3 activation and type-I and type-III IFN production. By contrast, ANKIB1 and OPTN are dispensable for robust RIG-I–MAVS signalling, whereas TANK, NAP1 and/or SINTBAD are required for it, as previously reported36.
Interestingly, the biochemical mechanism of the catalytic activity of ANKIB1 is distinct from that of other RBR-E3s such as PARKIN or HOIP72,73 as it depends on the RBR-RING1 rather than the RBR-RING2. The identification of this currently unique mechanism for ANKIB1 among the RBR-E3s proposes the existence of two distinct types of RBR-E3s, one relying on RING2 and the other one on RING1. Structural studies will be required to determine how ANKIB1 accomplishes this.
We identify ANKIB1 as crucial driver of activation of TBK1, IRF3 and type-I/III IFN induction in signalling triggered by TLR3, TRIF-dependent TLR4 and cGAS–STING, but not RIG-I. Contrasting with the latter, it was recently reported that ANKIB1 would interfere with RIG-I-induced IFN induction, that is, exert the opposite function to the one we identified for ANKIB1 in TLR3, TLR4 and cGAS–STING but not RIG-I–MAVS signalling, by mediating the proteasomal degradation of MAVS through K48-linked ubiquitination74. However, we neither observed such interference with RIG-I-induced IFN induction in ANKIB1-proficient cells nor did we detect proteasomal degradation of MAVS upon treatment of such cells with the RIG-I ligand 3p-hpRNA or by infection with the RIG-I-stimulating viruses IAV and SeV. We attribute this differential requirement to distinct biochemical mechanisms of TBK1 activation downstream of various PRRs. Whereas cGAS–STING and TRIF-dependent TLR3 and TLR4 signalling rely on OPTN-mediated TBK1 phosphorylation, which requires recruitment via ANKIB1-generated K11-linked ubiquitin chains, TBK1 activation downstream of RIG-I–MAVS primarily depends on the adaptor proteins TANK, NAP1 and SINTBAD, whose recruitment, as we show, is ANKIB1-independent.
In summary, we here identify a previously unrecognized ANKIB1–K11-Ub–OPTN–TBK1 signalling axis as the crucial driver of IRF3-mediated IFN induction downstream of TLR3, TLR4 and cGAS–STING (Extended Data Fig. 5j). Notably, ANKIB1 deletion confers significant protection in an otherwise lethal TLR3-dependent interferonopathy mouse model. Future strategies aimed at inhibiting the catalytic function of ANKIB1 or degrading it altogether may open additional avenues for treating IFN-driven pathologies.
All animal procedures were conducted in accordance with European, national and institutional guidelines and approved by local government authorities (LAVE NRW; permission Az. 81-02.04.2020.A022). Study protocols and animal experiments performed in Zaragoza were approved by the Animal Experimentation Ethics Committee of the University of Zaragoza (numbers PI 18/2, PI 18/23, PI 62/22 and PI 24/25) and in accordance with institutional, national and European ethical animal regulations (Protection of Animals Act).
The coding sequence of ANKIB1 was amplified using Phusion High-Fidelity PCR Master Mix (New England Biolabs) and cloned to the pBABE-Puro plasmid using XhoI and AgeI (New England Biolabs). Deletions and point mutations were introduced to into the plasmid using the primers presented in Supplementary Table 1 with the Q5 Site-Directed Mutagenesis kit (New England Biolabs) according to the manufacturer's instructions.
E1, E2s, USP2 and ubiquitin were purchased from R&D systems. moTAP-TNF was produced and purified as described in ref. 75. Poly(I:C) HMW was purchased from Invivogen. LPS was purchased from Enzo Life Sciences. ADU-S100 was purchased from MedchemExpress and 2′3′cGAMP was purchased from Selleck Chemicals. All primers listed in Supplementary Table 1 were produced by Sigma-Aldrich.
WT HeLa (ATCC CCL-2), HT-29 (ATCC HTB-38) and A549 (ATCC CCL-185) cell lines used herein were purchased from the ATCC. ANKIB1 and TLR3 were depleted using the plasmid px458 with the respective gRNA sequences presented in Supplementary Table 1 and performing single-cell sorting upon transfection. TANK/NAP1/SINTBAD/OPTN were generated using the gRNA published in ref. 10. The generation of viral particles and reconstitution of cancer cell lines with different ANKIB1 mutants or TLR3-moTAP were performed as described previously10. Reconstituted cells were either selected via GFP-positive cell sorting by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) or via puromycin treatment.
Proteins were separated using 4–15% Mini- or Midi-PROTEAN-TGXTM-gels (Bio-Rad) with Tris/glycine/SDS running buffer. Proteins were transferred on Mini- or Midi-0.2-μm nitrocellulose membranes (Bio-Rad transfer packs) using the Trans-Blot Turbo Transfer System from Bio-Rad. Proteins were analysed by western blotting using the respective antibodies presented in Supplementary Table 2 and either LLC Western Lightning Plus ECL (Revvity Health Sciences) for chemiluminescent signal or a Li-Cor Odyssey CLx for fluorescent signal.
C57BL/6N Ankib1−/− tm1a mice were developed by the European Conditional Mouse Mutagenesis Program using Knockout-First-Reporter Tagged Insertion allele technology. The mice used in this study were maintained and bred in the animal facility of the CECAD Research Centre, University of Cologne. Their microbiological status was examined as recommended by the Federation of European Laboratory Animal Science Associations and the mice were free of all listed pathogens.
Bone marrow isolation was performed as described previously10. Cells were plated in non-coated 10-cm dishes at a concentration of 2 × 106 cells ml−1 and treated with 20 ng ml−1 M-CSF for 7 days. The cells were then detached with 10 mM EDTA for 10 min and plated in a 12-well plate for the experiments. Splenocytes were isolated from 8–12-week-old mice. Spleens were mashed on a 75-μm filter and red blood cells were removed as for BMDMs. Cells were counted and plated at 2.5 × 106 cells ml−1 in DMEM containing 1% L-glutamine and 1% penicillin/streptomycin with 10% decomplemented FBS.
Total RNAs from HeLa and HT-29 cells with or without the respective treatment were extracted using the RNeasy Mini Kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer's instructions From the cDNA generated by the Iscript Reverse Transcription Supermix (Bio-Rad), RT–qPCR was performed using Itaq Universal SYBR (Bio-Rad), with the primers listed in Supplementary Table 1 and the following conditions: initial polymerase activation step of 30 s at 95 °C, followed by 35 amplification cycles of 5 s at 95 °C and 30 s at 64 °C. Three technical replicates were generated for each sample and run on a Bio-Rad CFX Opus 96. GAPDH was used as reference gene and the relative expression of the gene transcripts was analysed using the 2−ΔCt method.
For RT–qPCR after in vitro infection with either MVA or SeV, samples were collected with 250 µl lysis buffer (4 M guanidine thiocyanate, 25 mM Tris–HCl pH 7 and 143 mM 2-mercaptoethanol) followed by the addition of 250 µl 70% ethanol. Total RNA was extracted using a silica column (Epoch Life Science) and washed once with wash buffer 1 (1 M guanidine thiocyanate, 25 mM Tris–HCl pH 7 and 10% ethanol) and twice with wash buffer 2 (25 mM Tris–HCl pH 7 and 70% ethanol). Total RNA was eluted using nuclease-free water. Then 500 ng of RNA was used to produce cDNA using SuperScript III reverse transcriptase (Thermo Scientific) following the manufacturer's protocol. Samples were diluted and used as input in a 20 µl reaction using the KAPA SYBR Fast System (Roche) following the manufacturer's protocol.
Total RNA from HeLa cells treated with poly(I:C) were extracted using the RNeasy Mini kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer's instructions. RNA sequencing was performed by CeGaT GmbH. In brief, 10 ng RNA of each sample were used for library preparation with the SMART-Seq stranded total RNA kit (Takara). Libraries were sequenced on a NovaSeq 6000 machine (Illumina) with 2× 100 bp. The sequencing reads were demultiplexed with Illumina bcl2fastq (2.20) and adaptors were trimmed with Skewer (version 0.2.2). Quality trimming of the reads was not performed. The raw counts derived from the mapping contain the number of reads that map to each gene ID. Based on these numbers, the normalized counts were calculated. Normalized counts were calculated with DESeq2 in R.
Total RNA from the spleen of poly(I:C)-injected mice were extracted using the RNeasy Mini kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer's instructions. mRNA sequencing for mouse spleen samples was performed by Cologne Center for Genomics. Briefly, 3′ mRNA libraries were generated from 200 ng (spleen samples) total RNA using the QuantSeq 3′ mRNA-Seq FWD V2 Library Prep kit (Lexogen) according to the manufacturer's protocol and using 17 cycles for library amplification. After validation (using a TapeStation, Agilent Technologies) and quantification (Qubit, Thermo Fisher Scientific) individual libraries were pooled. The library pools were quantified using the Collibri Library Quantification kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific) and the QuantStudio 5 Real-Time PCR System (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The libraries were subsequently sequenced on an Illumina NovaSeq 6000 instrument using a 1× 100 bp sequencing protocol and aiming for 10–12 million reads per sample.
Supernatants were collected upon respective treatment. Before freezing at −80 °C, samples were spun down for 10 min at 450g and the supernatants were transferred. The IFNβ ELISA was conducted following the manufacturer's protocol (R&D).
For cell activation followed by immunoprecipitation, cells were treated for the indicated times and then lysed in 1 ml lysis buffer (30 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.5, 120 mM NaCl, 1,7 mM DDM, 2 mM KCl, 2 mM EDTA, 10% glycerol, phosSTOP (Roche) and EDTA-free protease inhibitor cocktail (Roche)) at 4 °C for 20 min before centrifugation at 17,500g at 4 °C for 30 min. Subsequently, the cell lysates were incubated with M2 anti-Flag magnetic beads (Sigma-Aldrich) overnight at 4 °C. The following day, beads were washed five times with lysis buffer and proteins were eluted by boiling in reducing sample buffer. Samples were analysed by western blotting as previously described.
The coding sequence of AMSH was cloned into the GEX6-P2 vector. pOPINK-Cezanne (OTU, aa 53–446) was a gift from David Komander (Addgene plasmid #61581; RRID: Addgene_61581). The glutathione S-transferase (GST)-tagged TUBE (GST-TUBE) was previously described76. Expression vectors were transformed into BL21 (DE3) bacteria and the respective proteins were purified as described previsouly75. After purification, the GST tag was removed from AMSH and Cezanne using human rhinovirus 3C protease (Cytiva 27084301) according to the manufacturer's instructions. The protein concentration was measured with a Nanophotometer (Implen).
MoTAP tagged-ANKIB1 WT and ΔRING2 were purified by Flag-tag. The amount and quality of purification was assessed by Coomassie brilliant blue G-250. Different versions of ANKIB1 were incubated for 1 h at 37 °C in a 30 μl reaction mixture containing either 200 nM UBA1; 1 μM UBE2L3, 1 μM UBE2D3 or 1 μM UBE2L6; 100 μg ml−1 ubiquitin (R&D systems); 2 mM DTT; 30 mM Tris–HCl, pH 7.5; 5 mM MgCl2 and 1× Energy Regenerating Solution (Enzo Life Sciences). For negative controls, ubiquitin buffer was added instead of the E1 and E2. Afterward, the samples were analysed by western blot. For subsequent deubiquitinase assay, ANKIB1 was removed with M2-Flag beads and either USP2 or Cezanne were added at a concentration of 1 μM and 0.5 µM, respectively, and samples were incubated at 30 °C for 1 h. The reaction was terminated by adding and boiling in reducing sample buffer.
The amino acid sequence of the K11-Ub linkage-specific 2A3/2E6 antibody was as previously described60, and the coding sequence was synthesized by Thermo Scientific and cloned into the pVITRO plasmid using AgeI, BsrGI, BspeI and BamHI restriction enzymes (New England Biolabs). The antibody was transiently expressed in Expi293F cells (Gibco, A14527) and purified using a Protein G column (Sigma-Aldrich, GE17-0618-01).
HeLa WT, ANKIB1-deficient and stably expressing RING1-mutant ANKIB1 cells were treated with either poly(I:C) or 2′3′cGAMP for the indicated times and then sonicated and lysed in denaturing TUBE PD lysis buffer (30 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.5, 120 mM NaCl, 2 mM EDTA, 2 mM KCl, 1 mM CaCl2, 1 mM MgCl2, 0.5% Triton-X 100 1% SDS, 10% glycerol, phosSTOP (Roche) and EDTA-free protease inhibitor cocktail (Roche)) and 45 µM PR619 DUB inhibitor (Selleckchem) at 4 °C for 30 min before centrifugation at 17,500g for 30 min. Samples were then diluted with SDS-free TUBE PD lysis buffer, thus decreasing the SDS concentration to 0.1%, and then incubated with glutathione sepharose beads (Cytiva) freshly pre-coupled with GST-TUBE (20 μg per sample) overnight at 4 °C. The following day, beads were washed with SDS-free TUBE PD lysis buffer and proteins were either eluted from beads by boiling with reducing sample buffer followed by immunoblotting or subjected to an ‘in vitro deubiquitination assay' after washing beads twice with DUB reaction buffer (50 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.5 and 100 mM NaCl). In short, the beads were incubated with 600 µg ml−1 K48-tetraubiquitin chains (Adipogen) in DUB reaction buffer with 1 mM DTT at 37 °C for 30 min. Meanwhile, AMSH, Cezanne and USP2 (R&D Systems) were diluted to 2× the indicated concentrations in DUB dilution buffer (25 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl and 1 mM DTT) and incubated at room temperature for 10 min. The respective DUBs were then mixed with the beads and incubated at 37 °C for 1 h. The reactions were terminated by boiling the samples in reducing sample buffer before analysis by immunoblotting.
Age-matched (12–16-week-old) male WT littermate control (n = 8) and Ankib1−/−(n = 5) mice were anaesthetised in a mouse anaesthesia induction chamber with 2–3% isoflurane. Mice were infected intranasally with 1 × 106 plaque-forming units (p.f.u.) of HSV-1 SC16 strain, using a total volume of 40 µl. Mice were weighed daily and a clinical score was applied when mice showed signs of disease. The clinical score evaluated mouse appearance, level of consciousness, activity, response to stimuli, eye appearance and frequency and quality of respiration, standardized to a five-point scale ranging from 0 to 4. The humanitarian end point was reached with a 25% weight loss, a score equal to or higher than 15 or if any respiratory characteristics increased by more than 3 (ref. 77). Mice were euthanized following human end point standards.
The model of secondary HLH was performed using age-matched (8-week-old) female and male WT littermate control (n = 8) and Ankib1−/− (n = 9) mice as described previously78. For the sepsis model, a strain of E. coli isolated from the blood of a WT mouse with CLP-induced sepsis was used79. Sepsis was induced by inoculating 2 × 10⁸ colony-forming units in 200 µl of PBS to 8-week-old female and male WT littermate control (n = 9) and Ankib1−/− (n = 8) mice via intraperitoneal injection. The mice were weighed and observed daily, with sepsis scoring performed regularly, and survival monitored over 5 days. A humane end point was applied when the murine sepsis score exceeded 14 or when body weight loss was greater than 25%.
Age-matched (12–16-week-old) WT littermate control (n = 7) and Ankib1−/− (n = 7) female and male mice were infected with a mouse-adapted pandemic influenza strain H1N1 A/PR/8/3424 virus. The mice were anesthetized in a chamber with 2–3% isoflurane and intranasally infected with 2 × 103 p.f.u. of IAV in 40 µl. The mice were weighed and observed daily, with sepsis scoring performed and survival monitored as described previously77.
Monolayers of HeLa or A549 cells in 6-well plates were washed once with PBS and infected with the indicated viruses at a multiplicity of infection of 5 (MVA, HSV-1 and IAV) or 1 (SeV) in diluted serum-free media for 2 h at 37 °C. Inoculum was then removed and replaced with complete DMEM. Cell lysates were collected on ice at the indicated time points with RIPA buffer (50 mM Tris–HCl pH 8, 150 mM NaCl, 1% NP40, 0.1%SDS and 0.5% Na Deoxycholate) supplemented with complete EDTA-free protease inhibitors and PhosSTOP phosphatase inhibitor cocktail for western blot analysis.
At day 3 post-infection with HSV-1, brainstems of mice were isolated and subjected to RNA extraction using the RNeasy Mini kit (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Total RNA was quantified using a spectrophotometer. For each reaction, 300 ng of purified total RNA was hybridized with nCounter Reporter and Capture probe sets (nCounter XT PGX MmV1 Cancer Immune) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Hybridization was performed in a total volume of 15 μl at 65 °C for 18 h. Following hybridization, samples were loaded on the nCounter cartridge using the nCounter Prep Station and data were collected with the nCounter digital analyser. Raw counts were normalized using the housekeeping genes included in the nCounter XT Codeset and the nSolver software's Basic Analysis tool. Normalized counts were exported for downstream analysis. Heat maps were generated using the pheatmap function from the pheatmap R package (vR 4.5.1).
Pathway analysis was performed with an overrepresentation test (Fisher's exact test) using PANTHER v19.0 and the Gene Ontology (GO) database (https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15066566, released on 16 March 2025). In brief, downregulated genes with a moderate to high effect (log2FC <−0.5) were used as a gene list and the entire gene panel measured by the nCounter assay was used as the background. Gene symbols were used as identifiers.
HeLa WT and ANKIB1-deficient cells were treated with poly(I:C) for the indicated times and lysed in denaturing K11 immunoprecipitation-lysis buffer (30 mM Tris–HCl pH 7.5, 120 mM NaCl, 2 mM EDTA, 2 mM KCl, 1% Triton-X 100, 1% SDS, 10% glycerol, phosSTOP, EDTA-free protease inhibitor cocktail and 45 µM PR619 DUB inhibitor) and processed as described in TUBE PD but then incubated with protein G-beads freshly pre-coupled with K11 antibody overnight at 4 °C. The following day, beads were washed with SDS-free K11 immunoprecipitation-lysis buffer and proteins were eluted by boiling them in reducing sample buffer. Samples were analysed by immunoblotting.
Lung samples were obtained from a weighed portion of murine lung, homogenized in 500 µl DMEM with a GentleMACS dissociator (Miltenyi) and centrifuged (900g for 5 min). The addition of 0.5% Triton-X 100 and protease inhibitor (Complete, Roche) to the homogenates inactivated the virus and prevented degradation.
The multiplex ELISA was performed via a custom Luminex Discovery assay (R&D Bio-Techne) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Samples were centrifuged at 10,000g for 5 min and diluted at a 1:2 ratio in Calibrator Diluent (R&D Bio-Techne) before analysis. Samples were measured with a Luminex 200 xMAP system (Luminex) and xPONENT software was used for data collection and analysis.
For the in vitro ubiquitin assay, samples were prepared for mass spectrometry analysis after in-gel digestion overnight with trypsin. All samples were analysed by the CECAD Proteomics Facility on aQ Exactive Plus Orbitrap mass spectrometer coupled to an EASY nLC (both Thermo Scientific). Peptides were loaded with solvent A (0.1% formic acid in water) onto an in-house packed analytical column (50 cm, 75 µm inner diameter, filled with 2.7 µm Poroshell EC120 C18, Agilent). Peptides were chromatographically separated at a constant flow rate of 250 nl min−1 using the following gradient: 3–5% solvent B (0.1% formic acid in 80% acetonitrile) within 1.0 min, 5–30% solvent B within 121.0 min, 30–40% solvent B within 19.0 min, 40–95% solvent B within 1.0 min, followed by washing and column equilibration. The mass spectrometer was operated in data-dependent acquisition mode. The MS1 survey scan was acquired from 300 to 1750 m/z at a resolution of 70,000. The top ten most abundant peptides were isolated within a 1.8-Th window and subjected to HCD fragmentation at a normalized collision energy of 27%. The AGC target was set to 5e5 charges, allowing a maximum injection time of 110 ms. Product ions were detected in the Orbitrap at a resolution of 35,000. Precursors were dynamically excluded for 10.0 s.
All mass spectrometric raw data were processed with Maxquant v2.0.3.0 (ref. 80) using default parameters against the Uniprot canonical Human database (UP5640, downloaded 26 August 2020) with the match-between-runs option enabled between replicates. Follow-up analysis was done in Perseus 1.6.15 (ref. 81). Protein groups were filtered for potential contaminants and insecure identifications. The log2 intensities values of the different linkage types found in the samples were used to identify their respective abundance.
All data collection and analysis for in vivo experiments were performed blindly by three researchers. GraphPad Prism V9.4 software (Graphpad) was used for statistical analyses. The normality of all data was confirmed using Anderson–Darling or Shapiro–Wilk tests. Error bars denote either s.e.m. or s.d. The statistical significance of data was assessed by either two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), uncorrected Fisher's least significant difference (LSD) multiple-comparisons test, unpaired two-tailed Student's t-test or Kolmogorov–Smirnov or Fisher's exact test with 95% confidence intervals. Survival curves were compared using a log-rank Mantel–Cox test with 95% confidence intervals. No statistical methods were used to predetermine sample sizes for in vivo experiments but our sample sizes are similar to those reported in previous publications59,78,79. Mice of the indicated genotype were randomly assigned to groups. No data were excluded from any experimental group.
Further information on research design is available in the Nature Portfolio Reporting Summary linked to this article.
The mass spectrometry proteomics data (Fig. 2e) have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD065049. The RNA datasets generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available owing to ongoing scientific research but are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request. No custom codes were developed in this study. Source data are provided with this paper.
Muller, U. et al. Functional role of type I and type II interferons in antiviral defense. Science 264, 1918–1921 (1994).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Haller, O., Arnheiter, H., Gresser, I. & Lindenmann, J. Virus-specific interferon action. Protection of newborn Mx carriers against lethal infection with influenza virus. J. Exp. Med. 154, 199–203 (1981).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Durbin, J. E. et al. Type I IFN modulates innate and specific antiviral immunity. J. Immunol. 164, 4220–4228 (2000).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Kawai, T. & Akira, S. The role of pattern-recognition receptors in innate immunity: update on Toll-like receptors. Nat. Immunol. 11, 373–384 (2010).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Perry, A. K., Chow, E. K., Goodnough, J. B., Yeh, W. C. & Cheng, G. Differential requirement for TANK-binding kinase-1 in type I interferon responses to Toll-like receptor activation and viral infection. J. Exp. Med. 199, 1651–1658 (2004).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Tenoever, B. R. et al. Multiple functions of the IKK-related kinase IKKε in interferon-mediated antiviral immunity. Science 315, 1274–1278 (2007).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Yum, S., Li, M., Fang, Y. & Chen, Z. J. TBK1 recruitment to STING activates both IRF3 and NF-kB that mediate immune defense against tumors and viral infections. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2100225118 (2021).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Tanaka, Y. & Chen, Z. J. STING specifies IRF3 phosphorylation by TBK1 in the cytosolic DNA signaling pathway. Sci. Signal. 5, ra20 (2012).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Liu, S. et al. Phosphorylation of innate immune adaptor proteins MAVS, STING, and TRIF induces IRF3 activation. Science 347, aaa2630 (2015).
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Lafont, E. et al. TBK1 and IKKε prevent TNF-induced cell death by RIPK1 phosphorylation. Nat. Cell Biol. 20, 1389–1399 (2018).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Gerlach, B. et al. Linear ubiquitination prevents inflammation and regulates immune signalling. Nature 471, 591–596 (2011).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Haas, T. L. et al. Recruitment of the linear ubiquitin chain assembly complex stabilizes the TNF-R1 signaling complex and is required for TNF-mediated gene induction. Mol. Cell 36, 831–844 (2009).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Zinngrebe, J. et al. LUBAC deficiency perturbs TLR3 signaling to cause immunodeficiency and autoinflammation. J. Exp. Med. 213, 2671–2689 (2016).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Li, F. et al. Structural insights into the ubiquitin recognition by OPTN (optineurin) and its regulation by TBK1-mediated phosphorylation. Autophagy 14, 66–79 (2018).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Peltzer, N. et al. LUBAC is essential for embryogenesis by preventing cell death and enabling haematopoiesis. Nature 557, 112–117 (2018).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Pawlyk, A. C. et al. Novel monoclonal antibodies demonstrate biochemical variation of brain parkin with age. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 48120–48128 (2003).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Hemmi, H. et al. The roles of two IkB kinase-related kinases in lipopolysaccharide and double stranded RNA signaling and viral infection. J. Exp. Med. 199, 1641–1650 (2004).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
McWhirter, S. M. et al. IFN-regulatory factor 3-dependent gene expression is defective in Tbk1-deficient mouse embryonic fibroblasts. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 101, 233–238 (2004).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Cusson-Hermance, N., Khurana, S., Lee, T. H., Fitzgerald, K. A. & Kelliher, M. A. Rip1 mediates the Trif-dependent Toll-like receptor 3- and 4-induced NF-κB activation but does not contribute to interferon regulatory factor 3 activation. J. Biol. Chem. 280, 36560–36566 (2005).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Spratt, D. onaldE., Walden, H. & Shaw, G. aryS. RBR E3 ubiquitin ligases: new structures, new insights, new questions. Biochem. J. 458, 421–437 (2014).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Walden, H. & Rittinger, K. RBR ligase–mediated ubiquitin transfer: a tale with many twists and turns. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 25, 440–445 (2018).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Kamadurai, H. B. et al. Insights into ubiquitin transfer cascades from a structure of a UbcH5B approximately ubiquitin–HECT(NEDD4L) complex. Mol. Cell 36, 1095–1102 (2009).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Eddins, M. J., Carlile, C. M., Gomez, K. M., Pickart, C. M. & Wolberger, C. Mms2–Ubc13 covalently bound to ubiquitin reveals the structural basis of linkage-specific polyubiquitin chain formation. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 13, 915–920 (2006).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Fallon, L. et al. A regulated interaction with the UIM protein Eps15 implicates parkin in EGF receptor trafficking and PI(3)K-Akt signalling. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 834–842 (2006).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Tseng, P.-H. et al. Different modes of ubiquitination of the adaptor TRAF3 selectively activate the expression of type I interferons and proinflammatory cytokines. Nat. Immunol. 11, 70–75 (2009).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Häcker, H. et al. Specificity in Toll-like receptor signalling through distinct effector functions of TRAF3 and TRAF6. Nature 439, 204–207 (2005).
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Oganesyan, G. et al. Critical role of TRAF3 in the Toll-like receptor-dependent and -independent antiviral response. Nature 439, 208–211 (2005).
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Mevissen, T. E. T. et al. Molecular basis of Lys11-polyubiquitin specificity in the deubiquitinase Cezanne. Nature 538, 402–405 (2016).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Rahighi, S. et al. Specific recognition of linear ubiquitin chains by NEMO is important for NF-κB activation. Cell 136, 1098–1109 (2009).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Dikic, I., Wakatsuki, S. & Walters, K. J. Ubiquitin-binding domains—from structures to functions. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 10, 659–671 (2009).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Miller, S. L., Malotky, E. & O'Bryan, J. P. Analysis of the role of ubiquitin-interacting motifs in ubiquitin binding and ubiquitylation. J. Biol. Chem. 279, 33528–33537 (2004).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Gleason, C. E., Ordureau, A., Gourlay, R., Arthur, J. S. C. & Cohen, P. Polyubiquitin binding to optineurin is required for optimal activation of tank-binding kinase 1 and production of interferon β. J. Biol. Chem. 286, 35663–35674 (2011).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Sasai, M. et al. NAK-associated protein 1 participates in both the TLR3 and the cytoplasmic pathways in type I IFN induction. J. Immunol. 177, 8676–8683 (2006).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Clark, K., Takeuchi, O., Akira, S. & Cohen, P. The TRAF-associated protein TANK facilitates cross-talk within the IκB kinase family during Toll-like receptor signaling. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 17093–17098 (2011).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Goncalves, A. et al. Functional dissection of the TBK1 molecular network. PLoS ONE 6, e23971 (2011).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Ryzhakov, G. & Randow, F. SINTBAD, a novel component of innate antiviral immunity, shares a TBK1-binding domain with NAP1 and TANK. EMBO J. 26, 3180–3190 (2007).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Slowicka, K. et al. Optineurin deficiency in mice is associated with increased sensitivity to Salmonella but does not affect proinflammatory NF-κB signaling. Eur. J. Immunol. 46, 971–980 (2016).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Meena, N. P. et al. The TBK1-binding domain of optineurin promotes type I interferon responses. FEBS Lett. 590, 1498–1508 (2016).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Munitic, I. et al. Optineurin insufficiency impairs IRF3 but Not NF-κB activation in immune cells. J. Immunol. 191, 6231–6240 (2013).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Kagan, J. C. et al. TRAM couples endocytosis of Toll-like receptor 4 to the induction of interferon-b. Nat. Immunol. 9, 361–368 (2008).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Rehwinkel, J. & Gack, M. U. RIG-I-like receptors: their regulation and roles in RNA sensing. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 20, 537–551 (2020).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Kato, H. et al. Differential roles of MDA5 and RIG-I helicases in the recognition of RNA viruses. Nature 441, 101–105 (2006).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
McCullough, J., Clague, M. J. & Urbe, S. AMSH is an endosome-associated ubiquitin isopeptidase. J. Cell Biol. 166, 487–492 (2004).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Ritorto, M. S. et al. Screening of DUB activity and specificity by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry. Nat. Commun. 5, 4763 (2014).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Hatesuer, B. et al. Deletion of Irf3 and Irf7 genes in mice results in altered interferon pathway activation and granulocyte-dominated inflammatory responses to influenza A infection. J. Innate Immun. 9, 145–161 (2017).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Channappanavar, R. et al. Dysregulated Type I interferon and inflammatory monocyte-macrophage responses cause lethal pneumonia in SARS-CoV-infected mice. Cell Host Microbe 19, 181–193 (2016).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Crow, Y. J. & Stetson, D. B. The type I interferonopathies: 10 years on. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 22, 471–483 (2022).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Rice, G. I. et al. Mutations in ADAR1 cause Aicardi–Goutieres syndrome associated with a Type I interferon signature. Nat. Genet. 44, 1243–1248 (2012).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Stetson, D. B., Ko, J. S., Heidmann, T. & Medzhitov, R. Trex1 prevents cell-intrinsic initiation of autoimmunity. Cell 134, 587–598 (2008).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Liu, Y. et al. Activated STING in a vascular and pulmonary syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 507–518 (2014).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Huang, Z. et al. Type I interferon signature and cycling lymphocytes in macrophage activation syndrome. J. Clin. Invest. 133, e165616 (2023).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Ohyagi, H. et al. Monocyte-derived dendritic cells perform hemophagocytosis to fine-tune excessive immune responses. Immunity 39, 584–598 (2013).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. T., Kim, Y. T., Jeong, G. & Jin, M. Immunopathology of and potential therapeutics for secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis/macrophage activation syndrome: a translational perspective. Exp. Mol. Med. 56, 559–569 (2024).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Roger, T. et al. Protection from lethal Gram-negative bacterial sepsis by targeting Toll-like receptor 4. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 2348–2352 (2009).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Arimori, Y. et al. Type I interferon limits influenza virus-induced acute lung injury by regulation of excessive inflammation in mice. Antivir. Res. 99, 230–237 (2013).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Loo, Y. M. et al. Distinct RIG-I and MDA5 signaling by RNA viruses in innate immunity. J. Virol. 82, 335–345 (2008).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Murphy, A. A., Rosato, P. C., Parker, Z. M., Khalenkov, A. & Leib, D. A. Synergistic control of herpes simplex virus pathogenesis by IRF-3, and IRF-7 revealed through non-invasive bioluminescence imaging. Virology 444, 71–79 (2013).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Rosato, P. C. & Leib, D. A. Neuronal interferon signaling is required for protection against herpes simplex virus replication and pathogenesis. PLoS Pathog. 11, e1005028 (2015).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Reinert, L. S. et al. Sensing of HSV-1 by the cGAS–STING pathway in microglia orchestrates antiviral defence in the CNS. Nat. Commun. 7, 13348 (2016).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Ames, J. et al. OPTN is a host intrinsic restriction factor against neuroinvasive HSV-1 infection. Nat. Commun. 12, 5401 (2021).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Matsumoto, M. L. et al. K11-linked polyubiquitination in cell cycle control revealed by a K11 linkage-specific antibody. Mol. Cell 39, 477–484 (2010).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
French, M. E., Koehler, C. F. & Hunter, T. Emerging functions of branched ubiquitin chains. Cell Discov. 7, 6 (2021).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Boname, J. M. et al. Efficient internalization of MHC I requires lysine-11 and lysine-63 mixed linkage polyubiquitin chains. Traffic 11, 210–220 (2010).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Dynek, J. N. et al. c-IAP1 and UbcH5 promote K11-linked polyubiquitination of RIP1 in TNF signalling. EMBO J. 29, 4198–4209 (2010).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Hoebe, K. et al. Identification of Lps2 as a key transducer of MyD88-independent TIR signalling. Nature 424, 743–748 (2003).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Yamamoto, M. et al. Role of adaptor TRIF in the MyD88-independent toll-like receptor signaling pathway. Science 301, 640–643 (2003).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Zhao, B. et al. A conserved PLPLRT/SD motif of STING mediates the recruitment and activation of TBK1. Nature 569, 718–722 (2019).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Tsuchida, T. et al. The ubiquitin ligase TRIM56 regulates innate immune responses to intracellular double-stranded DNA. Immunity 33, 765–776 (2010).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Zhang, J., Hu, M. M., Wang, Y. Y. & Shu, H. B. TRIM32 protein modulates type I interferon induction and cellular antiviral response by targeting MITA/STING protein for K63-linked ubiquitination. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 28646–28655 (2012).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Wang, Q. et al. The E3 ubiquitin ligase AMFR and INSIG1 bridge the activation of TBK1 kinase by modifying the adaptor STING. Immunity 41, 919–933 (2014).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Prabakaran, T. et al. Attenuation of cGAS–STING signaling is mediated by a p62/SQSTM1-dependent autophagy pathway activated by TBK1. EMBO J. 37, e97858 (2018).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Riley, B. E. et al. Structure and function of Parkin E3 ubiquitin ligase reveals aspects of RING and HECT ligases. Nat. Commun. 4, 1982 (2013).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Smit, J. J. et al. The E3 ligase HOIP specifies linear ubiquitin chain assembly through its RING-IBR-RING domain and the unique LDD extension. EMBO J. 31, 3833–3844 (2012).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Liu, W. et al. E3 ubiquitin ligase ANKIB1 attenuates antiviral immune responses by promoting K48-linked polyubiquitination of MAVS. Cell Rep. 43, 114687 (2024).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Draber, P. et al. LUBAC-recruited CYLD and A20 regulate gene activation and cell death by exerting opposing effects on linear ubiquitin in signaling complexes. Cell Rep. 13, 2258–2272 (2015).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Hjerpe, R. et al. Efficient protection and isolation of ubiquitylated proteins using tandem ubiquitin-binding entities. EMBO Rep. 10, 1250–1258 (2009).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Shrum, B. et al. A robust scoring system to evaluate sepsis severity in an animal model. BMC Res. Notes 7, 233 (2014).
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Wang, A. et al. Specific sequences of infectious challenge lead to secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis-like disease in mice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 2200–2209 (2019).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Uranga-Murillo, I. et al. Biological relevance of Granzymes A and K during E. coli sepsis. Theranostics 11, 9873–9883 (2021).
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Tyanova, S., Temu, T. & Cox, J. The MaxQuant computational platform for mass spectrometry-based shotgun proteomics. Nat. Protoc. 11, 2301–2319 (2016).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Tyanova, S. et al. The Perseus computational platform for comprehensive analysis of (prote)omics data. Nat. Methods 13, 731–740 (2016).
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Download references
We thank all members of the Walczak group for useful technical advice and fruitful scientific discussions, particularly M. Wakid for her support in preparation of the final manuscript. We thank the CECAD animal facility for generating Ankib1−/–tm1a mice. We also thank the members of the CECAD proteomics facility for valuable support and advice and K. Hofmann for valuable input and advice regarding ubiquitin linkage characterization.
H.W. is funded by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, a Wellcome Trust Investigator Award (no. 214342/Z/18/Z), a Medical Research Council Grant (no. MR/S00811X/1), a Cancer Research UK Programme grant (no.A27323), three collaborative research centre grants (SFB1399, project C06, SFB1530-455784452, SFB1399-413326622, project A03 and SFB1403–414786233) funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) and the NRW Network grant CANTAR funded from the programme ‘Netzwerke 2021', an initiative of the Ministry of Culture and Science of the State of Northrhine Westphalia. J.P. is funded by PID2020-113963RBI00, ASPANOA, FARO, Carrera de la mujer de Monzón, CIBERINFEC/ISCIII (CB21/13/00087), CERTERA/ISCIII (CERT22/00004), FORTALECE/ISCIII (FORT23/00028/03) and Aragon Government (Group B29_23R). M.A. is funded by a Postdoctoral Juan de la Cierva Contract and postdoctoral CIBER contract and I.U.-M. received a PhD grant from the Aragón Government (no. BOA-2018-06-15-027). J.B. received funding from a Mildred Scheel Nachwuchszentrum grant 70113307 by the German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe), a collaborative research centre grant (SFB1399, Project C07) and the NRW Network grant CANTAR. RNA sequencing was supported by the DFG Research Infrastructure West German Genome Center (project no. 407493903) as part of the Next Generation Sequencing Competence Network (project no. 423957469). Next-generatuion sequence analyses were carried out at the production site Cologne (Cologne Center for Genomics). A.A. is funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation and the European Union (European Regional Development's Funds, FEDER) (grant PID2021-128580OB-I00). B.J.F. is funded by UKRI BBSRC, BB/Y007212/1, UKRI MRC and UKRI430 grants. RNA sequencing was supported by the DFG Research Infrastructure West German Genome Center (project no. 407493903) as part of the Next Generation Sequencing Competence Network (project no. 423957469). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.
Open access funding provided by Universität zu Köln.
These authors contributed equally: Alexis Betrancourt, M. Talha Cinko.
These authors jointly supervised this work: Eva Rieser, Henning Walczak.
Cell Death, Inflammation and Immunity Laboratory, Institute of Biochemistry I, Faculty of Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Alexis Betrancourt, M. Talha Cinko, Ana Beatriz Varanda, Lucia-Maria Kaps, Bianca Buratti, Diego de Miguel, Eva Rieser & Henning Walczak
Cell Death, Inflammation and Immunity Laboratory, CECAD Cluster of Excellence, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Alexis Betrancourt, M. Talha Cinko, Ana Beatriz Varanda, Lucia-Maria Kaps, Bianca Buratti, Diego de Miguel, Eva Rieser & Henning Walczak
Centre for Cell Death, Cancer and Inflammation, UCL Cancer Institute, University College London, London, UK
Alexis Betrancourt, Diego de Miguel, Eva Rieser & Henning Walczak
CIBER de Enfermedades Infecciosas, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
Maykel Arias, Iratxe Uranga-Murillo, Natacha Peña & Julian Pardo
Aragón Health Research Institute (IIS Aragón), Zaragoza, Spain
Maykel Arias, Iratxe Uranga-Murillo, Natacha Peña, Diego de Miguel & Julian Pardo
Department of Microbiology, Paediatrics, Radiology and Preventive Medicine and Public Health, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain
Maykel Arias, Iratxe Uranga-Murillo, Natacha Peña & Julian Pardo
Department of Pathology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Long Fung Chau & Brian J. Ferguson
Mildred Scheel School of Oncology, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, Department of Translational Genomics, Cologne, Germany
Johannes Brägelmann
Medical Clinic III for Oncology, Hematology, Immune-Oncology and Rheumatology, University Hospital of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
Johannes Brägelmann
Cologne Centre for Genomics, Medical Faculty, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Kerstin Becker & Ramona Casper
Centro de Biología Molecular Severo Ochoa, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Rocio Martin & Antonio Alcami
Institute of Biochemistry, Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Eva Rieser
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
H.W. and E.R. conceived the project. A.B., M.T.C., H.W. and E.R. designed the experiments and A.B., M.T.C. and E.R. performed the majority of the experiments, with J.P., I.U.M., M.A. and N.P. helping in designing and performing the in vivo experiments. R.M. and A.A. contributed to the in vivo experiments. A.B.V., L.M.K. and B.B. supported in vitro experiments. A.B.V. and L.M.K. performed RNA and cytokine analysis. J.B., K.B. and R.C. performed the bioinformatic analysis of the RNA sequencing. L.F.C. and B.J.F. designed and performed in vitro infection experiments. D.d.M. generated essential tools for the study. A.B., M.T.C., E.R. and H.W. wrote the manuscript.
Correspondence to
Eva Rieser or Henning Walczak.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Nature Cell Biology thanks Xuetao Cao, Ivan Dikic and Nan Yan for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
a-c HeLa WT cells were transfected with either 20 nM non-targeting control siRNA (siCtrl) or 20 nM siRNA targeting the respective mRNAs of interest, individually for 48 hours or in b, 72 hours. Subsequently, they were stimulated with 10 µg/mL poly(I:C) as displayed and the lysates were subjected to western blot analysis. The knockdown efficiency of the targets was assessed by RT-qPCR in a, b or immunoblotting in c. For the panel of the western blots and RT-qPCR, one representative experiment was displayed of three independent replicates. Non-specific bands were marked with an asterisk.
Source data
a, HT-29 ANK −/− and WT cells were stimulated with 100 ng/mL TNF for the indicated times and subjected to western blot analysis. Non-specific bands were marked with an asterisk. b, HT-29 ANK −/− and WT or in c, HeLa WT and ANK −/− cells were treated with 10 µg/mL poly(I:C) for the indicated time points. d, ANKIB1 expression between HeLa WT, ANK −/− cells, and HeLa stably expressing moTAP-ANKIB1 WT cells. e, HeLa WT cells were stimulated with 1µg/mL moTAP-TNF and subjected to the pulldown via its Flag-tag. The purified TNFR1 and co-immunoprecipitated proteins were analysed by immunoblotting. One representative experiment of four independent replicates was shown for each western blot panel.
Source data
a, Purified moTAP-ANKIB1 WT was incubated with ubiquitin, E1, and different combinations of E2 enzymes in ATP regeneration solution for 1 h at 37 °C. All samples were resolved by SDS-PAGE and subjected to anti-ubiquitin immunoblotting. b, moTAP-ANKIB1 WT purified from HeLa cells was subjected to in vitro ubiquitination assay with UBE2D3 for 1 h at 37 °C. Then, the reactants were incubated with or without general deubiquitinase USP2 for 1 h at 30 °C. The samples were resolved by SDS-PAGE and subjected to anti-ubiquitin immunoblotting. c, A schematic illustration of putative domains of ANKIB1 and its different mutant versions were created in BioRender. Cinko, M. T. (2025) https://biorender.com/dm2lne6. Ankyrin1/2 domains, catalytic RBR domain, Ariadne domain, ubiquitin interactive motif (UIM), flexible linker, moTAP tag (2xStrep and 1x Flag). d, HeLa ANK −/− reconstituted with either moTAP-ANKIB1 WT or RING2 mutant (C519S/ C522S/ C532S/ C537S/ C540S/ C545S/ C548S) (ANK RING2mut) were stimulated with 10 µg/mL poly(I:C) for the indicated time points. The lysates were analyzed by immunoblotting. e, HeLa ANK −/− reconstituted with either moTAP-ANKIB1 WT or ΔRING2 (ANK ΔRING2) were stimulated with 10 µg/mL poly(I:C) for the indicated time points. The lysates were analyzed by immunoblotting. f, Purified moTAP-ANKIB1 WT and ΔRING2 were subjected to in vitro ubiquitination assay with UBE2D3 and UBE2L3 for 1 h at 37 °C. All samples were resolved by SDS-PAGE and subjected to anti-ubiquitin and ANKIB1 immunoblotting. For western blot, one representative experiment was displayed of three independent experiments.
Source data
a, A549 WT and ANK −/− or in b, HT-29 WT and ANK −/− cells were treated with 10 µg/mL ADU-S100. The lysates were analysed by western blot. c, HeLa cells stably expressing moTAP ANK WT cells were treated with 10 µg/mL ADU S-100. moTAP-ANKIB1 was pulled-down via its Flag-tag. Immunoprecipitated proteins were analysed by immunoblotting. d, HeLa cells stably expressing either moTAP ANK WT or ANK ΔUIM cells were treated with 10 µg/mL 2´3´ cGAMP. The lysates were analysed by western blot. e, A549 WT and ANK −/− were treated with either 50 ng/mL, 100 ng/mL or 200 ng/mL of 3p-hpRNA. The lysates were analysed by western blot. f, IFNβ mRNA was measured by RT-qPCR 6 h after stimulation of HeLa WT and ANK −/− cells with 200 ng/mL 3p-hpRNA. P = 0.0818. g, A549 WT and ANK −/− cells were either treated with 200 ng/mL 3p-hpRNA or infected with SeV/ IAV for the indicated times and subjected to western blot analysis. h, HeLa WT and OPTN −/− cells were treated with 200 ng/mL of 3p-hpRNA. The lysates were analysed by western blot. i, HeLa WT and TKO cells were treated with 10 µg/mL ADU S-100. The lysates were analysed by western blot. The graphs represent mean ± SEM of six independent experiments. P values were determined by two-way ANOVA with uncorrected Fisher's LSD test in 95% confidence interval. ∗ P ≤ 0.05; ∗∗ P ≤ 0.01; ∗∗∗ P ≤ 0.001;; ∗∗∗ P ≤ 0.0001. For western blot, one representative experiment of three independent replicates was displayed. Non-specific bands were marked with an asterisk.
Source data
a, Mendelian frequencies obtained from inter-crossing Ankib1+/− mice. b, ANKIB1 expression was evaluated in various mouse tissues by western blotting. One representative experiment of three independent biological replicates was shown. c, Graph represents the ratio in percent of spleen weight (g) to body weight (g) in littermate control (n = 11) and Ankib1−/−(n = 12) mice. P = 0.5639. d, Number of immune cells isolated from spleen digestion in littermate control (n = 4) and Ankib1−/− (n = 4) mice were measured by flow cytometry, using anti-CD45 staining. P = 0.5942. e, Representative images from various organs of 10-month-old littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice stained with H&E. One representative image of three independent biological replicates per genotype was shown. f, Ankib1+/− and Ankib1−/− BMDMs were stimulated with 5 µg/mL poly(I:C) for the indicated times, and the lysates were assessed by western blotting. g, h, Ankib1+/− and Ankib1−/− splenocytes were treated with either 200 ng/mL LPS or 5 µg/mL ADU S-100 for the indicated times, and the lysates were analysed by western blotting. i, Ankib1+/− and Ankib1−/− BMDMs were stimulated with 200 ng/mL 3p-hpRNA for the indicated times, and the lysates were assessed by western blotting. In all western blot panels, one representative experiment of four independent biological replicates was shown. Graphical data shows mean ± SD of independent biological replicates per genotype. Statistical analysis was performed by unpaired two tailed Student's t-test in 95% confidence interval. j, Representative scheme of the “Unrecognized signalling axis ANKIB1–K11-Ub–OPTN in the downstream of different PRRs” was created in BioRender. Cinko, M. T. (2025) https://biorender.com/munm5yp. ANKIB1 is a crucial module of TLR3, TLR4-TRIF and STING-SCs and once recruited, it generates K-11 Ub chains on various signalling proteins, facilitating OPTN-TBK1 recruitment, thereby activation of TBK1. Other types of ubiquitin linkages are present, such as K-63, as well as mixed ubiquitin chains. TBK1 phosphorylates the IRF3-binding motif of TRIF and STING, initially enabling the recruitment of IRF3 and later its phosphorylation by TBK1, which induces interferon production consequently (left panel). However, TLR4-MyD88 signalling arm and another IFN-inducing SC, MAVS-SC does not require ANKIB1-K11 Ub-OPTN signalling axis for TBK1 activation (right panel).
Source data
a, 5 mg/kg LPS were intraperitoneally administered to WT littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice and the survival rate was monitored over days. P values were determined using log-rank Mantel-Cox test in 95% confidence interval. P > 0.9999. b, c, d, e Different gene enrichment set analysis were performed using RNA samples from the spleen of WT littermate control and Ankib1−/− mice 3 and 6 hours after poly(I:C) injection. Statistical significance of the data was determined using Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. f, The concentration of IL-6 in lung homogenates of WT littermate control (n = 4) and Ankib1−/− (n = 5) mice was measured by ELISA at 5 days post infection with HSV-1. P = 0.8060. Data shows independent biological replicates per genotype. Statistical analysis was performed by unpaired two tailed Student's t-test in 95% confidence interval.
Source data
List of primers used in this study.
List of antibodies used in this study.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Unprocessed western blots.
Statistical source data.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
Betrancourt, A., Cinko, M.T., Varanda, A.B. et al. Lysine-11 ubiquitination drives type-I/III interferon induction by cGAS–STING and Toll-like receptors 3 and 4.
Nat Cell Biol (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-026-01886-z
Download citation
Received: 21 October 2024
Accepted: 20 January 2026
Published: 06 March 2026
Version of record: 06 March 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-026-01886-z
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Advertisement
Nature Cell Biology
(Nat Cell Biol)
ISSN 1476-4679 (online)
ISSN 1465-7392 (print)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited
Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.
Scientists have discovered that electrons can be propelled across solar materials at speeds close to the fastest nature allows, a result that challenges long accepted ideas about how solar energy systems operate.
The finding could open new paths for designing technologies that capture sunlight more efficiently and convert it into electricity.
In laboratory experiments tracking events lasting just 18 femtoseconds -- less than 20 quadrillionths of a second -- researchers at the University of Cambridge observed electric charge separating during a single molecular vibration.
"We deliberately designed a system that, according to conventional theory, should not have transferred charge this fast," said Dr. Pratyush Ghosh, Research Fellow, at St John's College, Cambridge, and first author of the study. "By conventional design rules, this system should have been slow and that's what makes the result so striking.
"Instead of drifting randomly, the electron is launched in one coherent burst. The vibration acts like a molecular catapult. The vibrations don't just accompany the process, they actively drive it."
Watching Electrons Move on the Timescale of Atoms
A femtosecond is one quadrillionth of a second -- one second holds about eight times more femtoseconds than all the hours that have passed since the universe began. At this incredibly small timescale, atoms inside molecules are constantly vibrating.
The researchers observed electrons moving between materials at essentially the same pace as those atomic motions. As Ghosh explained, "We're effectively watching electrons migrate on the same clock as the atoms themselves."
The research, published in Nature Communications March 5, 2026, challenges long standing design assumptions in solar energy science. Until now, scientists generally believed that ultrafast charge transfer required large energy differences between materials and strong electronic coupling. Those conditions can reduce efficiency by limiting voltage and increasing energy loss.
How Light Creates Energy in Solar Materials
When light strikes many carbon based materials, it creates a tightly bound packet of energy called an exciton -- a paired electron and hole. For devices such as solar cells, photodetectors and photocatalytic systems to function effectively, this pair must separate quickly into free charges.
The faster the split occurs, the less energy is wasted. This ultrafast separation plays a critical role in determining how efficiently solar panels and other light harvesting technologies convert sunlight into usable power.
To investigate whether this trade off was unavoidable, the Cambridge researchers intentionally created what they expected to be a poorly performing system. They placed a polymer donor next to a non fullerene acceptor with almost no energy difference and only weak interaction -- conditions that should have significantly slowed charge transfer.
Instead, the electron crossed the interface in just 18 femtoseconds. That speed is faster than many previously studied organic systems and matches the natural rhythm of atomic motion. "Seeing it happen on this timescale within a single molecular vibration is extraordinary," said Dr. Ghosh.
Molecular Vibrations Drive Ultrafast Electron Motion
Ultrafast laser experiments helped reveal the mechanism behind this unexpected result. When the polymer absorbs light, it begins vibrating in specific high frequency patterns.
These vibrations mix electronic states and effectively push the electron across the boundary, creating a directional, ballistic motion instead of slow and random diffusion.
Once the electron reaches the acceptor molecule, it sets off a new coherent vibration. This distinctive signal is rarely observed in organic materials and indicates how quickly the transfer occurs. "That coherent vibration is a clear fingerprint of how fast and how cleanly the transfer occurs.
"Our results show that the ultimate speed of charge separation isn't determined only by static electronic structure," said Dr. Ghosh. "It depends on how molecules vibrate. That gives us a new design principle. In a way, this gives us a new rulebook. Instead of fighting molecular vibrations, we can learn how to use the right ones."
Implications for Solar Energy and Light Harvesting
The discovery suggests a new strategy for designing more efficient light harvesting technologies. Ultrafast charge separation is fundamental to systems such as organic solar cells, photodetectors and photocatalytic devices that can produce clean hydrogen fuel. Similar processes also occur naturally during photosynthesis.
Professor Akshay Rao, Professor of Physics at the Cavendish Laboratory and former St John's College Research Associate, who was a co author of the study, said: "Instead of trying to suppress molecular motion, we can now design materials that use it -- turning vibrations from a limitation into a tool."
The project involved scientists from the Cavendish Laboratory and the Yusuf Hamied Department of Chemistry at the University of Cambridge, including Dr. Rakesh Arul, St John's College Research Fellow. Collaborators in Italy, Sweden, the United States, Poland and Belgium also contributed to the research.
Story Source:
Materials provided by St. John's College, University of Cambridge. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
Journal Reference:
Cite This Page:
A Tiny Brain Molecule May Trigger a Chain Reaction Linked to Autism
New Research Reveals Why Women Experience Longer-Lasting Pain
Scientists Discover Promising New Way to Treat Rett Syndrome
Scientists May Have Found the “Holy Grail” of Quantum Computing
Stay informed with ScienceDaily's free email newsletter, updated daily and weekly. Or view our many newsfeeds in your RSS reader:
Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks:
Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?
Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Nature Communications
, Article number: (2026)
Cite this article
We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its
findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note
there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.
Third-generation long-read sequencing technologies, significantly improve metagenome assemblies. Highly accurate PacBio HiFi reads can yield hundreds of near-complete metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) from a single sample. Recently, the accuracy of the more cost-effective Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) platform has increased to a per-base error rate of 1-2%. However, current metagenome assemblers are optimized for HiFi and do not scale to the large data sets that ONT enables. We present nanoMDBG, an evolution of metaMDBG, which supports the latest ONT reads through an error correction pre-processing step in minimizer-space. Across a range of ONT datasets, including a large 400 Gbp soil sample, nanoMDBG reconstructs up to twice as many high-quality MAGs as the next best ONT assembler, metaFlye, while requiring a third of the CPU time and memory. Critically, the latest ONT technology can now produce comparable MAG construction results as those obtained using PacBio HiFi at the same sequencing depth.
The sequence data generated in this study have been deposited in the European Nucleotide Archive as the BioProject PRJEB88618. The individual accession numbers of all sequences used are: ERR15316007: Zymo ONT; ERR15285694: Human gut ONT; ERR15289757: Soil ONT; ERR15289675: Human gut HiFi; ERR15289804: Soil HiFi. Zymo mock reference genomes are available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/zymo-files/BioPool/D6331.refseq.zip. The ONT Zymo Fecal Reference data set is available at https://epi2me.nanoporetech.com/lc2024-datasets/. The HiFi Zymo Fecal Reference data set is available at https://www.pacb.com/connect/datasets/#metagenomics-datasets. Source data are provided with this paper.
We implemented the nanoMDBG method in the metaMDBG software (https://github.com/GaetanBenoitDev/metaMDBG). The nanopore mode is activated using the input parameter (–in-ont), and the original PacBio HiFi mode using the parameter (–in-hifi). The analysis scripts used in this study to compare assemblers are available at https://github.com/GaetanBenoitDev/NanoMDBG_Manuscript.
Quince, C., Walker, A. W., Simpson, J. T., Loman, N. J. & Segata, N. Shotgun metagenomics, from sampling to analysis. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 833–844 (2017).
Google Scholar
Pinto, Y. & Bhatt, A. S. Sequencing-based analysis of microbiomes. Nat. Rev. Genet. 25, 829–845 (2024).
Google Scholar
Alneberg, J. et al. Binning metagenomic contigs by coverage and composition. Nat. Methods 11, 1144–1146 (2014).
Google Scholar
Pan, S., Zhao, X.-M. & Coelho, L. P. SemiBin2: self-supervised contrastive learning leads to better mags for short-and long-read sequencing. Bioinformatics 39, i21–i29 (2023).
Google Scholar
Wang, Z. et al. Effective binning of metagenomic contigs using contrastive multi-view representation learning. Nat. Commun. 15, 585 (2024).
Google Scholar
Chen, L.-X., Anantharaman, K., Shaiber, A., Eren, A. M. & Banfield, J. F. Accurate and complete genomes from metagenomes. Genome Res. 30, 315–333 (2020).
Google Scholar
Bickhart, D. M. et al. Generating lineage-resolved, complete metagenome-assembled genomes from complex microbial communities. Nat. Biotechnol. 40, 711–719 (2022).
Google Scholar
Feng, X., Cheng, H., Portik, D. & Li, H. Metagenome assembly of high-fidelity long reads with hifiasm-meta. Nat. Methods 19, 671–674 (2022).
Google Scholar
Benoit, G. et al. High-quality metagenome assembly from long accurate reads with metaMDBG. Nat. Biotechnol. 42, 1378–1383 (2024).
Moss, E. L., Maghini, D. G. & Bhatt, A. S. Complete, closed bacterial genomes from microbiomes using nanopore sequencing. Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 701–707 (2020).
Google Scholar
Sereika, M. et al. Oxford Nanopore r10.4 long-read sequencing enables the generation of near-finished bacterial genomes from pure cultures and metagenomes without short-read or reference polishing. Nat. Methods 19, 823–826 (2022).
Google Scholar
Sanderson, N. D. et al. Comparison of R9.4.1/Kit10 and R10/Kit12 Oxford Nanopore flowcells and chemistries in bacterial genome reconstruction. Microb. Genom. 9, mgen000910 (2023).
Kolmogorov, M. et al. metaFlye: scalable long-read metagenome assembly using repeat graphs. Nat. Methods 17, 1103–1110 (2020).
Google Scholar
Ekim, B., Berger, B. & Chikhi, R. Minimizer-space de Bruijn graphs: whole-genome assembly of long reads in minutes on a personal computer. Cell Syst. 12, 958–968 (2021).
Google Scholar
Quince, C. et al. STRONG: metagenomics strain resolution on assembly graphs. Genome Biol. 22, 214 (2021).
Google Scholar
Portik, D. M. et al. Highly accurate metagenome-assembled genomes from human gut microbiota using long-read assembly, binning, and consolidation methods. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.10.593587 (2024).
Chklovski, A., Parks, D. H., Woodcroft, B. J. & Tyson, G. W. CheckM2: a rapid, scalable and accurate tool for assessing microbial genome quality using machine learning. Nat. Methods 20, 1203–1212 (2023).
Google Scholar
Camargo, A. P. et al. Identification of mobile genetic elements with geNomad. Nat. Biotechnol. 42, 1303–1312 (2023).
Nayfach, S. et al. CheckV assesses the quality and completeness of metagenome-assembled viral genomes. Nat. Biotechnol. 39, 578–585 (2021).
Google Scholar
Stanojević, D., Lin, D., Nurk, S., Florez de Sessions, P. & Šikić, M. Telomere-to-telomere phased genome assembly using HERRO-corrected simplex nanopore reads. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.18.594796 (2024).
Li, Y. et al. Repeat and haplotype aware error correction in nanopore sequencing reads with DeChat. Commun. Biol. 7, 1678 (2024).
Olm, M. R., Brown, C. T., Brooks, B. & Banfield, J. F. dRep: a tool for fast and accurate genomic comparisons that enables improved genome recovery from metagenomes through de-replication. ISME J. 11, 2864–2868 (2017).
Google Scholar
Trigodet, F., Sachdeva, R., Banfield, J. F. & Eren, A. M. Troubleshooting common errors in assemblies of long-read metagenomes. Nat. Biotechnol. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-025-02971-8 (2026). Epub ahead of print.
Stewart, R. D. et al. Compendium of 4,941 rumen metagenome-assembled genomes for rumen microbiome biology and enzyme discovery. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 953–961 (2019).
Google Scholar
Eren, A. M. et al. Community-led, integrated, reproducible multi-omics with anvi'o. Nat. Microbiol. 6, 3–6 (2021).
Google Scholar
Li, H. Minimap2: pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 34, 3094–3100 (2018).
Google Scholar
Vicedomini, R., Quince, C., Darling, A. E. & Chikhi, R. Strainberry: automated strain separation in low-complexity metagenomes using long reads. Nat. Commun. 12, 4485 (2021).
Google Scholar
Shaw, J., Gounot, J.-S., Chen, H., Nagarajan, N. & Yu, Y. W. Floria: fast and accurate strain haplotyping in metagenomes. Bioinformatics 40, i30–i38 (2024).
Google Scholar
Kazantseva, E., Donmez, A., Frolova, M., Pop, M. & Kolmogorov, M. Strainy: phasing and assembly of strain haplotypes from long-read metagenome sequencing. Nat. Methods 11, 2034–2043 (2024).
Google Scholar
Shaw, J., Marin, M. G. & Li, H. High-resolution metagenome assembly for modern long reads with myloasm. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.09.05.674543 (2025).
Cheng, H., Concepcion, G. T., Feng, X., Zhang, H. & Li, H. Haplotype-resolved de novo assembly using phased assembly graphs with hifiasm. Nat. methods 18, 170–175 (2021).
Google Scholar
Rautiainen, M. et al. Telomere-to-telomere assembly of diploid chromosomes with Verkko. Nat. Biotechnol. 41, 1474–1482 (2023).
Google Scholar
Shaw, J. & Yu, Y. W. Fast and robust metagenomic sequence comparison through sparse chaining with skani. Nat. Methods 20, 1661–1665 (2023).
Google Scholar
Sahlin, K., Baudeau, T., Cazaux, B. & Marchet, C. A survey of mapping algorithms in the long-reads era. Genome Biol. 24, 133 (2023).
Google Scholar
Blanca, A., Harris, R. S., Koslicki, D. & Medvedev, P. The statistics of k-mers from a sequence undergoing a simple mutation process without spurious matches. J. Comput. Biol. 29, 155–168 (2022).
Google Scholar
Vaser, R., Sović, I., Nagarajan, N. & Šikić, M. Fast and accurate de novo genome assembly from long uncorrected reads. Genome Res. 27, 737–746 (2017).
Google Scholar
Nawrocki, E. P., Kolbe, D. L. & Eddy, S. R. Infernal 1.0: inference of RNA alignments. Bioinformatics 25, 1335–1337 (2009).
Google Scholar
Price, M. N., Dehal, P. S. & Arkin, A. P. FastTree 2–approximately maximum-likelihood trees for large alignments. PloS one 5, e9490 (2010).
Google Scholar
Chaumeil, P.-A., Mussig, A. J., Hugenholtz, P. & Parks, D. H. GTDB-Tk v2: memory friendly classification with the genome taxonomy database. Bioinformatics 38, 5315–5316 (2022).
Google Scholar
Louca, S. & Doebeli, M. Efficient comparative phylogenetics on large trees. Bioinformatics 34, 1053–1055 (2018).
Google Scholar
Yu, G. Using ggtree to visualize data on tree-like structures. Curr. Protoc. Bioinforma. 69, e96 (2020).
Google Scholar
Wang, L.-G. et al. Treeio: an r package for phylogenetic tree input and output with richly annotated and associated data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 37, 599–603 (2020).
Google Scholar
Xu, S. et al. ggtreeExtra: compact visualization of richly annotated phylogenetic data. Mol. Biol. Evol. 38, 4039–4042 (2021).
Google Scholar
Hyatt, D. et al. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinforma. 11, 1–11 (2010).
Google Scholar
Altschul, S. F. et al. Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 25, 3389–3402 (1997).
Google Scholar
Tatusov, R. L., Galperin, M. Y., Natale, D. A. & Koonin, E. V. The COG database: a tool for genome-scale analysis of protein functions and evolution. Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 33–36 (2000).
Google Scholar
Lu, S. et al. CDD/SPARCLE: the conserved domain database in 2020. Nucleic Acids Res. 48, D265–D268 (2020).
Google Scholar
Rognes, T., Flouri, T., Nichols, B., Quince, C. & Mahé, F. VSEARCH: a versatile open source tool for metagenomics. PeerJ 4, e2584 (2016).
Google Scholar
Wilkinson, L. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. (Springer, 2011).
Shen, W., Le, S., Li, Y. & Hu, F. SeqKit: a cross-platform and ultrafast toolkit for FASTA/Q file manipulation. PLoS One 11, e0163962 (2016).
Google Scholar
Download references
C.Q. and S.R. acknowledge the support of the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), part of UK Research and Innovation; Earlham Institute Strategic Program (ISP) Grant (Decoding Biodiversity) BBX011089/1 and its constituent work package BBS/E/ER/230002C; the Core Strategic Program Grant (Genomes to Food Security) BB/CSP1720/1 and its constituent work packages BBS/E/T/000PR9818 and BBS/E/T/000PR9817; and the Core Capability Grant BB/CCG2220/1. C.Q. and R.J. acknowledge the QIB Food Microbiome and Health ISP BB/X011054/1 and its constituent project BBS/E/F/000PR13631. The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the QIB Colon Model Facility, which was funded by the BBSRC Core Capability Grant BB/CCG2260/1. R.C. was supported by ANR grants ANR-22-CE45-0007, ANR-19-CE45-0008, PIA/ANR16-CONV-0005, ANR-19-P3IA-0001, ANR-21-CE46-0012-03, and Horizon Europe grants No. 872539, 956229, 101047160 and 101088572 (ERC IndexThePlanet, also supporting G.B.). We acknowledge the assistance of Dr. Susheel Bhanu Busi (CEH, Wallingford) in organizing the soil sampling.
These authors jointly supervised this work: Rayan Chikhi, Christopher Quince.
Institut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, Sequence Bioinformatics Unit, Paris, France
Gaëtan Benoit & Rayan Chikhi
Quadram Institute, Norwich, UK
Robert James, Georgina Alabone & Christopher Quince
Earlham Institute, Norwich, UK
Sébastien Raguideau, Georgina Alabone & Christopher Quince
School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK
Georgina Alabone & Christopher Quince
UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wallingford, UK
Tim Goodall
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
G.B. devised and implemented the approach and performed analysis with assistance from S.R., R.J., and G.A. prepared DNA extracts for sequencing and constructed libraries. T.G. collected soil samples. G.B., R.C., and C.Q. conceived the study and supervised and coordinated the work. All authors wrote, reviewed, edited and approved the manuscript.
Correspondence to
Christopher Quince.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Nature Communications thanks Ben Woodcroft and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. A peer review file is available.
Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
Benoit, G., James, R., Raguideau, S. et al. High-quality metagenome assembly from nanopore reads with nanoMDBG.
Nat Commun (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-69760-y
Download citation
Received: 06 May 2025
Accepted: 06 February 2026
Published: 06 March 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-69760-y
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Advertisement
Nature Communications
(Nat Commun)
ISSN 2041-1723 (online)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited
Sign up for the Nature Briefing: AI and Robotics newsletter — what matters in AI and robotics research, free to your inbox weekly.
Researchers from the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, and UC San Diego have identified new genetic mechanisms that influence how key immune cells decide their fate. These cells, known as CD8 "killer" T cells, can either develop into durable defenders that provide lasting protection or fall into a weakened state known as exhaustion. The study found that switching off just two genes can restore the ability of exhausted T cells to attack tumors.
The research, published in Nature, provides a framework that may allow scientists to deliberately program T cells so they maintain both long-term immune memory and strong cancer-fighting activity. The findings could have significant implications for cancer immunotherapy as well as treatments for infectious diseases.
CD8 killer T cells are vital to the immune system because they locate and destroy virus infected cells and cancer cells. However, when the immune system faces long lasting infections or tumors, these cells can gradually lose their effectiveness. Over time they can enter a dysfunctional condition called T cell exhaustion, where their ability to eliminate threats declines.
Building a Genetic Atlas of T Cell States
Protective T cells and exhausted ones can appear nearly identical, which makes them difficult to distinguish using traditional methods. To address this challenge, researchers explored whether these different states could be separated based on genetic activity.
A major breakthrough came from constructing a detailed genetic atlas that maps a range of CD8 T cell states. This atlas shows how these immune cells shift along a spectrum that runs from highly protective to severely impaired.
"Our long-term goal is to make immune therapies work better by creating clear 'recipes' for designing T cells," says co-corresponding author Susan Kaech, PhD, a professor at the Salk Institute at the time of the study. "To do that, we first needed to identify which molecular ingredients are uniquely active in one T cell state but not others. By building a comprehensive atlas of CD8 T cell states, we were able to pinpoint the key factors that define protective versus dysfunctional programs -- information that is essential for precisely engineering effective immune responses."
Can T Cell Exhaustion Be Reversed?
To understand how these immune states are controlled, the researchers examined nine distinct CD8 T cell conditions using advanced laboratory methods, genetic tools, mouse models, and computational analysis. Their work revealed several transcription factors, proteins that regulate gene activity, which act as switches that guide T cells toward either sustained function or exhaustion.
Among these regulators, the scientists identified two transcription factors called ZSCAN20 and JDP2 that had not previously been associated with T cell exhaustion. When these genes were disabled, exhausted T cells recovered their tumor killing ability while still maintaining long-term immune memory.
"We flipped specific genetic switches in the T cells to see if we could restore their tumor-killing function without damaging their ability to provide long-term immune protection," says co-corresponding author H. Kay Chung, PhD, an assistant professor at UNC Lineberger. Chung began this research at the Salk Institute before joining UNC. "We found that it was indeed possible to separate these two outcomes."
These findings challenge a long-standing assumption that immune exhaustion is an unavoidable result of prolonged immune activity.
Engineering Stronger Immune Cells for Cancer Therapy
The researchers say the genetic atlas they created could help guide the design of more powerful immune cells for treatments such as adoptive cell transfer (ACT) and CAR T cell therapy.
"Once we had this map, we could start giving T cells much clearer instructions -- helping them keep the traits that allow them to fight cancer or infection over the long term, while avoiding the pathways that cause them to burn out," says Kaech. "By separating these two programs, we can begin to design immune cells that are both durable and effective in cancer and chronic infection."
The discovery could be especially important for treating solid tumors, where immune exhaustion often limits the success of therapy.
AI and Future Strategies for Precision Immune Engineering
In future work, the team plans to combine advanced experimental techniques with AI guided computational modeling. Their goal is to develop many more precise genetic "recipes" that can program T cells into specific functional states, improving the precision of cellular therapies.
"Because genes work together in complex regulatory networks that are difficult to decipher, powerful computational tools are essential to pinpoint which regulators drive specific cell states," says co-corresponding author Wei Wang, PhD, a professor at UC San Diego. "This study shows that we can begin to precisely manipulate immune cell fates and unlock new possibilities for enhancing immune therapies."
By uncovering how killer T cells choose between resilience and exhaustion, the research moves scientists closer to deliberately guiding immune responses instead of watching them weaken during prolonged disease.
Other authors include Eduardo Casillas, Ming Sun, Shixin Ma, Shirong Tan, Brent Chick, Victoria Tripple, Bryan McDonald, Qiyuan Yang, Timothy Chen, Siva Karthik Varanasi, Michael LaPorte, Thomas H. Mann, Dan Chen, Filipe Hoffmann, Josephine Ho, April Williams, and Diana C. Hargreaves of Salk; Cong Liu, Alexander N. Jambor, Z. Audrey Wang, Jun Wang, Zhen Wang, Jieyuan Liu, and Zhiting Hu of UC San Diego; Anamika Battu, Brandon M. Pratt, Fucong Xie, Brian P. Riesenberg, Elisa Landoni, Yanpei Li, Qidang Ye, Daniel Joo, Jarred Green, Zaid Syed, Nolan J. Brown, Matthew Smith, Jennifer Modliszewski, Yusha Liu, Ukrae H. Cho, Gianpietro Dotti, Barbara Savoldo, Jessica E. Thaxton, and J. Justin Milner of UNC; Peixiang He, Longwei Liu, and Yingxiao Wang of University of Southern California; and Yiming Gao of Texas A&M University.
The work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (R37AI066232, R01AI123864, R21AI151986, R01CA240909, R01AI150282, R01HG009626, K01EB034321, R01AI177864, R01CA248359, R01CA244361, AI151123, EB029122, GM140929) and the Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation.
Story Source:
Materials provided by Salk Institute. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
Journal Reference:
Cite This Page:
A Tiny Brain Molecule May Trigger a Chain Reaction Linked to Autism
New Research Reveals Why Women Experience Longer-Lasting Pain
Scientists Discover Promising New Way to Treat Rett Syndrome
Scientists May Have Found the “Holy Grail” of Quantum Computing
Stay informed with ScienceDaily's free email newsletter, updated daily and weekly. Or view our many newsfeeds in your RSS reader:
Keep up to date with the latest news from ScienceDaily via social networks:
Tell us what you think of ScienceDaily -- we welcome both positive and negative comments. Have any problems using the site? Questions?
Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain
the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in
Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles
and JavaScript.
Advertisement
Nature Communications
, Article number: (2026)
Cite this article
We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its
findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note
there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.
Constrained by materials, structures, and interface, achieving high sensitivity, wide strain range, and linearity simultaneously remains an impossible triangle for flexible sensors. Herein, we propose 3D super-interface strategy based on patterned rubber substrate-conductive crack layer, successfully developing a microcrack super-interface flexible sensor (MSFS) with ultra-sensitivity (0–10% strain, GF 1.1 × 10⁸ and linearity 0.98). The 3D super-interface relies on the synergistic micro/nano level physical anchoring, and hydrogen bonding interfacial interactions between the rubber matrix and conductive crack layer, achieving strong interlayer bonding. During the sensing process, the crack structure endows the sensor ultra-sensitivity within 0–10% strain range; while the 3D super-interface ensures continuous electrical conductivity under >50% strain conditions. MSFS holds potential application value in monitoring expansion in silicon anode batteries. When the battery expansion reaches 2%, its resistance change can be as high as 22-fold. This approach enables the customized design of flexible sensors for ultra-sensitivity applications.
All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article (and its supplementary information files). Source data are available on Figshare at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30827915.
Jung, D. et al. Highly conductive and elastic nanomembrane forskin electronics. Science 373, 1022 (2021).
Google Scholar
Matsuhisa, N. et al. Printable elastic conductors by in situ formation of silver nanoparticles from silver flakes. Nat. Mater. 16, 834–840 (2017).
Google Scholar
Ates, H. C. et al. End-to-end design of wearable sensors. Nat. Rev. Mater. 7, 887–907 (2022).
Google Scholar
Cho, H. et al. Real-time finger motion recognition using skin-conformable electronics. Nat. Electron. 6, 619–629 (2023).
Google Scholar
Xu, C. et al. Three-dimensional micro strain gauges as flexible, modular tactile sensors for versatile integration with micro- and macroelectronics. Sci. Adv. 10, 6094 (2024).
Google Scholar
Wang, C. et al. Carbonized silk fabric for ultrastretchable, highly sensitive, and wearable strain sensors. Adv. Mater. 28, 6640–6648 (2016).
Google Scholar
Zheng, Y. et al. A molecular design approach towards elastic and multifunctional polymer electronics. Nat. Commun. 12, 5701 (2021).
Google Scholar
Kang, D. et al. Ultrasensitive mechanical crack-based sensor inspired by the spider sensory system. Nature 516, 222–226 (2014).
Google Scholar
Park, B. et al. Dramatically enhanced mechanosensitivity and signal-to-noise ratio of nanoscale crack-based sensors: effect of crack depth. Adv. Mater. 28, 8130–8137 (2016).
Google Scholar
Lin, M. et al. A high-performance, sensitive, wearable multifunctional sensor based on rubber/CNT for human motion and skin temperature detection. Adv. Mater. 34, 2107309 (2022).
Google Scholar
Lin, J. et al. Anti-liquid-interfering and bacterially antiadhesive strategy for highly stretchable and ultrasensitive strain sensors based on cassie-baxter wetting state. Adv. Funct. Mater. 30, 2000398 (2020).
Google Scholar
Liu, Y. et al. Ag–thiolate interactions to enable an ultrasensitive and stretchable MXene strain sensor with high temporospatial resolution. Nat. Commun. 15, 5354 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zhou, B. et al. Mechanoluminescent‑triboelectric bimodal sensors for self‑powered sensing and intelligent control. Nano-Micro Lett. 15, 72 (2023).
Google Scholar
Araromi, O. A. et al. Ultra-sensitive and resilient compliant strain gauges for soft machines. Nature 587, 219–224 (2020).
Google Scholar
Jia, J. et al. Janus and heteromodulus elastomeric fiber mats feature regulable stress redistribution for boosted strain sensing performance. ACS Nano 16, 16806–16815 (2022).
Google Scholar
Chao, M. et al. Wearable MXene nanocomposites-based strain sensor with tile-like stacked hierarchical microstructure for broad-range ultrasensitive sensing. Nano Energy 78, 105187 (2020).
Google Scholar
Wang, B. et al. Highly linear stretching sensors with braiding structure constraining cracks. Small 21, 2410851 (2025).
Google Scholar
Gabriel, E. S. et al. Why is mechanical fatigue different from toughness in elastomers? The role of damage by polymer chain scission. Sci. Adv. 7, eabg9410 (2021).
Google Scholar
Yang, Y. et al. A high-sensitive rubber-based sensor with integrated strain and humidity responses enabled by bionic gradient structure. Adv. Funct. Mater. 34, 2400789 (2024).
Google Scholar
Wang, X. et al. Harmonious state between filled and coated flexible conductive films: an ultra-high conductivity, sensitive and environmentally stable sensing film based on integrated layered structure. Compos. Part B-Eng. 255, 110645 (2023).
Google Scholar
Sun, H. et al. An ultrasensitive and stretchable strain sensor based on a microcrack structure for motion monitoring. Microsyst. Nanoeng. 8, 111 (2022).
Google Scholar
Jae-Hwan, L. et al. A fully biodegradable and ultra-sensitive crack-based strain sensor for biomechanical signal monitoring. Adv. Funct. Mater. 34, 2406035 (2024).
Google Scholar
Haitao, Y. et al. Computational design of ultra-robust strain sensors for soft robot perception and autonomy. Nat. Commun. 15, 1636 (2024).
Google Scholar
Zhao, S. et al. Polypyrrole-coated copper nanowire-threaded silver nanoflowers for wearable strain sensors with high sensing performance. Chem. Eng. J. 417, 127966 (2021).
Google Scholar
Senjiang, Y. et al. Ultrasensitive, highly stretchable and multifunctional strain sensors based on scorpion-leg-inspired gradient crack arrays. Chem. Eng. J. 497, 154952 (2024).
Google Scholar
Fengling, Z. et al. Kirigami-inspired 3D-printable mxene organohydrogels for soft electronics. Adv. Funct. Mater. 33, 2308487 (2023).
Google Scholar
Chirag, B. G., Cheng, X., Li, D., Chen, Z. & Lu, X. Carboxymethyl cellulose/polyacrylamide composite hydrogel for cascaded treatment/reuse of heavy metal ions in wastewater. J. Hazard. Mater. 364, 28–38 (2019).
Google Scholar
Download references
This work is primarily supported by Yukun Chen's personal funds and resources.
Lab of Advanced Elastomer, South China University of Technology, Tianhe District, Guangzhou, PR China
Xinghuo Wang
(王兴钬), Yaru Huang
(黄亚茹), Shiheng Yin
( 尹诗衡) & Yukun Chen
(陈玉坤)
School of Materials and Energy, Guangdong University of Technology, Guangzhou, PR China
Hui Wang
(王荟)
School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Guangxi University, Nanning, PR China
Chuanhui Xu
(徐传辉)
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, PR China
Zuankai Wang
(王钻开)
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar
X.W., Y.H., and Y.C. conceived the idea and data analysis. X.W. wrote the first paper. S.Y. helped with SEM testing. H.W. provided the SWCNT. X.W. conducted the majority of the experiments. C.X, Z.W., and Y.C. supervised the research, with guidance. X.W., C.X., and Y.C. revised the manuscript. All authors reviewed and commented on the paper.
Correspondence to
Hui Wang
(王荟), Chuanhui Xu
(徐传辉), Zuankai Wang
(王钻开) or Yukun Chen
(陈玉坤).
The authors declare no competing interests.
Nature Communications thanks Oluwaseun Araromi and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. A peer review file is available.
Publisher's note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
Wang, X., Huang, Y., Wang, H. et al. A rubber-based sensor with over 100 million-level ultra-sensitivity (0–10% strain range) via 3D super-interface.
Nat Commun (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-70434-y
Download citation
Received: 16 September 2025
Accepted: 26 February 2026
Published: 06 March 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-70434-y
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Advertisement
Nature Communications
(Nat Commun)
ISSN 2041-1723 (online)
© 2026 Springer Nature Limited
Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.
We were funded by YC for a consumer-focused product for higher-yield savings. But when we joined YC and got our funding, we realized we needed the product for our own startup's cash reserves, and other startups in the batch started telling us they wanted this too.We realized that traditional startup treasury products do much the same thing: open a brokerage account, sweep your cash into a money market fund (MMF), and charge a management fee. No strategy involved. (There is actually one widely-advertised treasury product that differentiates on yield, but instead of an MMF it uses a mutual fund where your principal is at considerable risk – it had a 9% loss in 2022 that took years to recover.)I come from a finance background, so this norm felt weird to me. The typical startup cashflow pattern is a large infusion from a raise covering 18–24 months of burn, drawn down gradually. That's a lot of capital sitting idle for a long time, where even a modest yield improvement compounds into real money.MMFs are the lowest rung of what's available in fixed income. Yes, they're very safe and liquid, but when you leave your whole treasury in one, you're giving up yield to get same-day liquidity on cash you won't touch for six months or more.
Big companies have treasury teams that actively manage their holdings and invest in a range of safe assets to maximize yield. But those sophisticated bond portfolios were just never made accessible to startups. That's what we're building.Our bond portfolio holds short-duration floating-rate agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS), which are an ideal, safe, high-yielding asset for long-term startup cash reserves under most circumstances.[1]The bond portfolio is managed by Regan Capital, which runs MBSF, the largest floating-rate agency MBS ETF in the country. Right now we're using MBSF to generate yields for customers (you can see its historical returns, including dividends, here: https://totalrealreturns.com/n/USDOLLAR,MBSF). We're working with Regan to set up a dedicated account with the same strategy, which will let us reduce fees and give each startup direct ownership of the underlying securities. All assets are held with an SEC-licensed custodian.Based on historical returns, we target 4.5–5% returns vs. roughly 3.5% from most money market funds.[2] Liquidity is typically available in 1-2 business days. We will charge a flat 0.25% annual fee on AUM, compared to the 0.15–0.60%, depending on balance, charged by other treasury providers.We think that startup banking products themselves (Brex, Mercury, etc.) are genuinely good at what they do: payments, payroll, card management. The problem is the treasury product bundled with them, not the bank. So rather than building another neobank, we built Palus to connect to your existing bank account via Plaid. Our goal was to create the simplest possible UX for this product: two buttons and a giant number that goes up.See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
We realized that traditional startup treasury products do much the same thing: open a brokerage account, sweep your cash into a money market fund (MMF), and charge a management fee. No strategy involved. (There is actually one widely-advertised treasury product that differentiates on yield, but instead of an MMF it uses a mutual fund where your principal is at considerable risk – it had a 9% loss in 2022 that took years to recover.)I come from a finance background, so this norm felt weird to me. The typical startup cashflow pattern is a large infusion from a raise covering 18–24 months of burn, drawn down gradually. That's a lot of capital sitting idle for a long time, where even a modest yield improvement compounds into real money.MMFs are the lowest rung of what's available in fixed income. Yes, they're very safe and liquid, but when you leave your whole treasury in one, you're giving up yield to get same-day liquidity on cash you won't touch for six months or more.
Big companies have treasury teams that actively manage their holdings and invest in a range of safe assets to maximize yield. But those sophisticated bond portfolios were just never made accessible to startups. That's what we're building.Our bond portfolio holds short-duration floating-rate agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS), which are an ideal, safe, high-yielding asset for long-term startup cash reserves under most circumstances.[1]The bond portfolio is managed by Regan Capital, which runs MBSF, the largest floating-rate agency MBS ETF in the country. Right now we're using MBSF to generate yields for customers (you can see its historical returns, including dividends, here: https://totalrealreturns.com/n/USDOLLAR,MBSF). We're working with Regan to set up a dedicated account with the same strategy, which will let us reduce fees and give each startup direct ownership of the underlying securities. All assets are held with an SEC-licensed custodian.Based on historical returns, we target 4.5–5% returns vs. roughly 3.5% from most money market funds.[2] Liquidity is typically available in 1-2 business days. We will charge a flat 0.25% annual fee on AUM, compared to the 0.15–0.60%, depending on balance, charged by other treasury providers.We think that startup banking products themselves (Brex, Mercury, etc.) are genuinely good at what they do: payments, payroll, card management. The problem is the treasury product bundled with them, not the bank. So rather than building another neobank, we built Palus to connect to your existing bank account via Plaid. Our goal was to create the simplest possible UX for this product: two buttons and a giant number that goes up.See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
I come from a finance background, so this norm felt weird to me. The typical startup cashflow pattern is a large infusion from a raise covering 18–24 months of burn, drawn down gradually. That's a lot of capital sitting idle for a long time, where even a modest yield improvement compounds into real money.MMFs are the lowest rung of what's available in fixed income. Yes, they're very safe and liquid, but when you leave your whole treasury in one, you're giving up yield to get same-day liquidity on cash you won't touch for six months or more.
Big companies have treasury teams that actively manage their holdings and invest in a range of safe assets to maximize yield. But those sophisticated bond portfolios were just never made accessible to startups. That's what we're building.Our bond portfolio holds short-duration floating-rate agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS), which are an ideal, safe, high-yielding asset for long-term startup cash reserves under most circumstances.[1]The bond portfolio is managed by Regan Capital, which runs MBSF, the largest floating-rate agency MBS ETF in the country. Right now we're using MBSF to generate yields for customers (you can see its historical returns, including dividends, here: https://totalrealreturns.com/n/USDOLLAR,MBSF). We're working with Regan to set up a dedicated account with the same strategy, which will let us reduce fees and give each startup direct ownership of the underlying securities. All assets are held with an SEC-licensed custodian.Based on historical returns, we target 4.5–5% returns vs. roughly 3.5% from most money market funds.[2] Liquidity is typically available in 1-2 business days. We will charge a flat 0.25% annual fee on AUM, compared to the 0.15–0.60%, depending on balance, charged by other treasury providers.We think that startup banking products themselves (Brex, Mercury, etc.) are genuinely good at what they do: payments, payroll, card management. The problem is the treasury product bundled with them, not the bank. So rather than building another neobank, we built Palus to connect to your existing bank account via Plaid. Our goal was to create the simplest possible UX for this product: two buttons and a giant number that goes up.See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
MMFs are the lowest rung of what's available in fixed income. Yes, they're very safe and liquid, but when you leave your whole treasury in one, you're giving up yield to get same-day liquidity on cash you won't touch for six months or more.
Big companies have treasury teams that actively manage their holdings and invest in a range of safe assets to maximize yield. But those sophisticated bond portfolios were just never made accessible to startups. That's what we're building.Our bond portfolio holds short-duration floating-rate agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS), which are an ideal, safe, high-yielding asset for long-term startup cash reserves under most circumstances.[1]The bond portfolio is managed by Regan Capital, which runs MBSF, the largest floating-rate agency MBS ETF in the country. Right now we're using MBSF to generate yields for customers (you can see its historical returns, including dividends, here: https://totalrealreturns.com/n/USDOLLAR,MBSF). We're working with Regan to set up a dedicated account with the same strategy, which will let us reduce fees and give each startup direct ownership of the underlying securities. All assets are held with an SEC-licensed custodian.Based on historical returns, we target 4.5–5% returns vs. roughly 3.5% from most money market funds.[2] Liquidity is typically available in 1-2 business days. We will charge a flat 0.25% annual fee on AUM, compared to the 0.15–0.60%, depending on balance, charged by other treasury providers.We think that startup banking products themselves (Brex, Mercury, etc.) are genuinely good at what they do: payments, payroll, card management. The problem is the treasury product bundled with them, not the bank. So rather than building another neobank, we built Palus to connect to your existing bank account via Plaid. Our goal was to create the simplest possible UX for this product: two buttons and a giant number that goes up.See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
Our bond portfolio holds short-duration floating-rate agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS), which are an ideal, safe, high-yielding asset for long-term startup cash reserves under most circumstances.[1]The bond portfolio is managed by Regan Capital, which runs MBSF, the largest floating-rate agency MBS ETF in the country. Right now we're using MBSF to generate yields for customers (you can see its historical returns, including dividends, here: https://totalrealreturns.com/n/USDOLLAR,MBSF). We're working with Regan to set up a dedicated account with the same strategy, which will let us reduce fees and give each startup direct ownership of the underlying securities. All assets are held with an SEC-licensed custodian.Based on historical returns, we target 4.5–5% returns vs. roughly 3.5% from most money market funds.[2] Liquidity is typically available in 1-2 business days. We will charge a flat 0.25% annual fee on AUM, compared to the 0.15–0.60%, depending on balance, charged by other treasury providers.We think that startup banking products themselves (Brex, Mercury, etc.) are genuinely good at what they do: payments, payroll, card management. The problem is the treasury product bundled with them, not the bank. So rather than building another neobank, we built Palus to connect to your existing bank account via Plaid. Our goal was to create the simplest possible UX for this product: two buttons and a giant number that goes up.See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
The bond portfolio is managed by Regan Capital, which runs MBSF, the largest floating-rate agency MBS ETF in the country. Right now we're using MBSF to generate yields for customers (you can see its historical returns, including dividends, here: https://totalrealreturns.com/n/USDOLLAR,MBSF). We're working with Regan to set up a dedicated account with the same strategy, which will let us reduce fees and give each startup direct ownership of the underlying securities. All assets are held with an SEC-licensed custodian.Based on historical returns, we target 4.5–5% returns vs. roughly 3.5% from most money market funds.[2] Liquidity is typically available in 1-2 business days. We will charge a flat 0.25% annual fee on AUM, compared to the 0.15–0.60%, depending on balance, charged by other treasury providers.We think that startup banking products themselves (Brex, Mercury, etc.) are genuinely good at what they do: payments, payroll, card management. The problem is the treasury product bundled with them, not the bank. So rather than building another neobank, we built Palus to connect to your existing bank account via Plaid. Our goal was to create the simplest possible UX for this product: two buttons and a giant number that goes up.See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
Based on historical returns, we target 4.5–5% returns vs. roughly 3.5% from most money market funds.[2] Liquidity is typically available in 1-2 business days. We will charge a flat 0.25% annual fee on AUM, compared to the 0.15–0.60%, depending on balance, charged by other treasury providers.We think that startup banking products themselves (Brex, Mercury, etc.) are genuinely good at what they do: payments, payroll, card management. The problem is the treasury product bundled with them, not the bank. So rather than building another neobank, we built Palus to connect to your existing bank account via Plaid. Our goal was to create the simplest possible UX for this product: two buttons and a giant number that goes up.See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
We think that startup banking products themselves (Brex, Mercury, etc.) are genuinely good at what they do: payments, payroll, card management. The problem is the treasury product bundled with them, not the bank. So rather than building another neobank, we built Palus to connect to your existing bank account via Plaid. Our goal was to create the simplest possible UX for this product: two buttons and a giant number that goes up.See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Q_gwSqtnxMWe are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
We are live with early customers from within YC, and accepting new customers on a rolling basis; you can sign up at https://palus.finance/.We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
We'd love feedback from founders who've thought about idle cash management or people with a background in fixed-income and structured products. Happy to go deep in the comments.[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
[1] Agency MBS are pools of residential mortgages guaranteed by federal government agencies (Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac). It's a $9T market with the same government backing and AAA/AA+ rating as the Treasuries in a money market fund. No investor has ever lost money in agency MBS due to borrower default.It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
It's worth acknowledging that many people associate “mortgage-backed securities” with the 2008 financial crisis. But the assets that blew up in 2008 were private-label MBS, bundles of risky subprime mortgages without federal guarantees. Agency MBS holders suffered no credit losses during the crisis, and post-2008 underwriting standards became even stricter. If anything, 2008 was evidence for the safety of agency MBS, not against it.The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
The agency guarantee eliminates credit risk. Our short-duration, floating-rate strategy addresses the other main risk: price risk. Fixed-rate bonds lose value when rates rise, but floating-rate bonds reset their coupon based on the SOFR benchmark, protecting against interest rate movements.[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
[2] This comes from the historical spread between MMFs and floating-rate agency MBS; MMFs typically pay very close to SOFR, while the MBS pay SOFR + 1 to 1.5%. This means that if the Federal Reserve changes interest rates and SOFR moves, both asset types will move by about the same amount, and that 1-1.5% premium will remain.This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Yields and spreads referenced are approximate and based on historical data.
Again, I hope this doesn't come as negative, but I'm not sure this is making the risk clear.
I am not sure I would suggest my portfolio companies to risk their treasuries unless I am sure they're fully understanding the risks associated. Do you intend to provide anything else?
reply
MBS bonds pay a risk premium for a reason, you're virtually free of credit risk, but you're assuming interest rate/duration risk (not particularly relevant if duration is low, I'm not familiar with the duration of short term floating rate MBSes)Also, what happens in a Silicon Valley bank type scenario, let's say you have lots of withdrawals and you have to liquidate at under face value. Who eats the loss?
Also, what happens in a Silicon Valley bank type scenario, let's say you have lots of withdrawals and you have to liquidate at under face value. Who eats the loss?
reply
The beauty of MBS floaters is that you're relatively insensitive to prepayments because to a first approximation they're always priced at par.From an investor standpoint, as they say, you're making maybe SOFR + 1.5%. That's not a very sext return. But let's say your banks repo desk is willing to finance the purchase at 5% down. Then you can lever up your investment 20x and now you're a big shot making SOFR+30%, which is very sexy. But what's that, when your lever like that, a tiny decline in price wipes out your entire stake (Welcome to 2008).
From an investor standpoint, as they say, you're making maybe SOFR + 1.5%. That's not a very sext return. But let's say your banks repo desk is willing to finance the purchase at 5% down. Then you can lever up your investment 20x and now you're a big shot making SOFR+30%, which is very sexy. But what's that, when your lever like that, a tiny decline in price wipes out your entire stake (Welcome to 2008).
reply
reply
Then, the benefit of saving 1-2% extra versus spending my time trying to actually running the business and doing things with our money in the real world, has meant I have never looked back. 1-2% on millions of dollars is significant but it's not nearly as impactful as finding Product-Market-Fit in your actual business.All this to say: I'd be in your target market but I'm simply not interested in a "marginally better" treasury system versus just going with my bank's options that make it easy for me.
All this to say: I'd be in your target market but I'm simply not interested in a "marginally better" treasury system versus just going with my bank's options that make it easy for me.
reply
reply
There are banks out there that will do business savings accounts not much below this (2.85%) while keeping things safe (FDIC insured) and liquid.https://www.liveoak.bank/business-savings/
https://www.liveoak.bank/business-savings/
reply
I think the yield is about 3.2% based on how we set it up to be as liquid as possible. We could have accepted less liquidity for more like 3.8%
reply
I like smart finance plays and I hope you can do that and stand out from the glut of finance bros who have (and continue to) muddied the water (poisoned the well?) with this approach of "tech on top if actual finance companies".Good luck out there!
Good luck out there!
reply
I've had an easy time setting up treasury accounts with Rho & Mercury for 2 co's, but the latter gave me a no-go on an account for a non profit.
reply
reply
If this gives an extra 1% per se, I imagine that is more worth it to a company fresh off a large fundraise with a ton of cash in the bank.Startups otherwise are lean and won't hold enough cash to get a meaningful return from the 1%.
Startups otherwise are lean and won't hold enough cash to get a meaningful return from the 1%.
reply
reply
reply
Founder Summit 2026 in Boston: Don't miss ticket savings of up to $300. Register Now.
Save up to $680 on your Disrupt 2026 pass. Ends 11:59 p.m. PT tonight. REGISTER NOW.
Latest
AI
Amazon
Apps
Biotech & Health
Climate
Cloud Computing
Commerce
Crypto
Enterprise
EVs
Fintech
Fundraising
Gadgets
Gaming
Google
Government & Policy
Hardware
Instagram
Layoffs
Media & Entertainment
Meta
Microsoft
Privacy
Robotics
Security
Social
Space
Startups
TikTok
Transportation
Venture
Staff
Events
Startup Battlefield
StrictlyVC
Newsletters
Podcasts
Videos
Partner Content
TechCrunch Brand Studio
Crunchboard
Contact Us
Claude's daily active users are on the rise on mobile devices, as are its new app installs, following the company's fallout with the Pentagon. After Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei refused to allow the government to use its AI systems for mass surveillance of Americans or to power fully autonomous weapons, the AI model provider behind Claude was marked as a supply-chain risk.
However, Anthropic's stance led many consumers to favor the model, data suggests.
App intelligence provider Appfigures reports that the U.S. downloads of Claude's mobile app continue to surpass those of ChatGPT. The most recent figures from March 2 show Claude with 149,000 daily downloads, compared with 124,000 for ChatGPT, the company's estimates indicate.
While download figures offer a window into how many new users are installing the app for the first time, active users offer insight into how many people are actually using it.
On that front, another market intelligence provider, Similarweb, found that Claude's app on iOS and Android devices saw 11.3 million daily active users on March 2, up 183% from the start of the year when usage was around 4 million, and up from 5 million daily active users at the beginning of February.
Claude's growth put it ahead of other AI apps by daily active users, like Perplexity and Microsoft Copilot, but not other top rivals like ChatGPT. This is partially due to the fact that Claude's jump in usage began later in the month, timed around the news of Anthropic's tense negotiations with the Pentagon. If these trends continue throughout March, it could rank higher.
Of course, ChatGPT still dominates the market by a significant factor, as its daily active users on March 2 were 250.5 million across iOS and Android.
Similarweb also reports that Claude's web traffic has been growing.
While it's still far behind other top AI providers in terms of web traffic, Claude's web traffic was up 43% month-over-month in February, and up 297.7% year-over-year. At least some of this growth could be at the expense of ChatGPT, whose web traffic dropped 6.5% month-over-month during the same time period. Gemini also saw a slight bump of 2.1%, which is slower growth than in previous months.
Anthropic itself has been touting Claude's progress, noting that its AI chatbot is now seeing more than 1 million sign-ups per day after becoming the No. 1 app on the U.S. App Store over the past weekend — a position it still holds. The app is also No. 1 in 15 other countries, including Austria, Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Switzerland, the U.K.
The company noted, too, that Claude has broken its own signup record every day since early last week in every country where Claude is available.
ChatGPT's app uninstalls, meanwhile, have been growing, an earlier report found.
Anthropic said it doesn't comment on third-party data, but a spokesperson noted that daily active users have more than tripled since the beginning of 2026, and paid subscribers have doubled.
Updated with Anthropic's comment after publication.
Topics
Consumer News Editor
Actively scaling? Fundraising? Planning your next launch?TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026 delivers tactical playbooks and direct access to 1,000+ founders and investors who are building, backing, and closing.Register by March 13 to save up to $300.
Cluely CEO Roy Lee admits to publicly lying about revenue numbers last year
Jensen Huang says Nvidia is pulling back from OpenAI and Anthropic, but his explanation raises more questions than it answers
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calls OpenAI's messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies,' report says
ChatGPT uninstalls surged by 295% after DoD deal
MyFitnessPal has acquired Cal AI, the viral calorie app built by teens
Anthropic's Claude reports widespread outage
The trap Anthropic built for itself
© 2026 TechCrunch Media LLC.
Reading time 3 minutes
NASA's Lunar Trailblazer probe didn't exactly live up to its name after it launched from Kennedy Space Center last year. The $72 million satellite—designed to map and study water across the surface of the Moon—mysteriously went dark on day one of its mission, and now we know why.
Following the incident, NASA convened a review panel to investigate what went wrong. The panel's report, recently obtained by NPR via a Freedom of Information Act request, states that the software that should have pointed Lunar Trailblazer's solar panels toward the Sun instead pointed them 180 degrees away from the Sun. Whoops.
This caused the satellite to enter a “cold state” with low power and no attitude control shortly after launch, resulting in a total loss of communications with ground teams, according to the report. This, coupled with “many erroneous on-board fault management actions,” ultimately led to Lunar Trailblazer's failure.
“Any single anomaly could have been recoverable given enough time, but the combination was too much to overcome,” the report states.
NASA told Gizmodo that “while the loss was disappointing, it provides powerful lessons that will be applied to future lower-cost missions.” A spokesperson for Lockheed Martin, the company that built the satellite, said that it too has been applying “lessons learned” from the incident to enhance its small satellite architecture.
“While Lunar Trailblazer didn't achieve its mission goals, the team successfully demonstrated many milestones, including navigating a main engine swap and an intense vibration test campaign,” the spokesperson said. “Across 50 years of deep space exploration, we have grown from mission anomalies, and Lunar Trailblazer is no exception.”
Lunar Trailblazer was one of the science payloads on the second Intuitive Machines robotic lunar lander mission, IM-2, which launched in February 2025 aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. The satellite separated from the rocket as planned about 48 minutes after launch, and mission operators established communications. But the next day, they suddenly lost contact.
Mission operators tried to reestablish contact with Lunar Trailblazer for months before finally throwing in the towel in July. NASA officially announced the end of the mission in August, stating that the team was unable to fully diagnose the problem or keep the satellite on its flight path without two-way communications.
The agency selected Lockheed Martin to design and build Lunar Trailblazer in 2020. According to the report, the company did not sufficiently test solar array phasing prior to launch. A true end-to-end SA phasing test “should have caught the error in the flight code that could have then been corrected before launch, eliminating one of the main anomalies during the mission,” it states.
It's important to note, however, that Lunar Trailblazer was a low-cost (Class D) mission. “Lunar Trailblazer was selected by NASA's SIMPLEx (Small Innovative Missions for Planetary Exploration) competition, which provides opportunities for lower-cost science spacecraft to ride-share with selected primary missions,” NASA told Gizmodo. “To maintain a lower overall mission cost, SIMPLEx missions have a higher risk posture and less stringent requirements for oversight and management.”
Had its deployment been successful, Lunar Trailblazer would have been a game changer in understanding the water on the surface of the Moon. While scientists know this precious resource is there, they know little about its form, abundance, or distribution.
The satellite would have used two cutting-edge instruments to help researchers investigate how different forms of water are distributed across the lunar surface, how thermal properties affect their distribution, and how the different forms of water change over time, according to NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. It would've been an incredible asset to NASA's Artemis program, which ultimately aims to establish a sustained human presence on the Moon.
At the time of the mission's termination, NASA said some of its technology will live on in the JPL-built Compact Imaging Spectrometer for the Moon (UCIS-Moon) instrument. The agency has selected that spectrometer, which is identical to Lunar Trailblazer's, for an orbital flight opportunity. Hopefully the lessons learned from this failed mission will safeguard future efforts to investigate lunar water.
This article was updated to include comments from NASA and Lockheed Martin.
Explore more on these topics
Share this story
Subscribe and interact with our community, get up to date with our customised Newsletters and much more.
Even when your power goes down, your Wi-Fi won't.
A pending contractor switchup marks another blow to Boeing, which is struggling to prove itself as a reliable strategic partner to NASA.
The agency tacked on an additional flight in 2027 to test lunar landers in Earth orbit.
An early morning eclipse will sweep across North America on March 3, posing a challenge for skywatchers along the eastern half of the continent.
During the record-long speech, the President made no mention of NASA's most important crewed mission since the Apollo era, even though the astronauts were in the audience.
Curiosity has been exploring a region filled with boxwork formations, which formed billions of years ago when water leaked through rock cracks.
©2026 GIZMODO USA LLC.
All rights reserved.
Reading time 3 minutes
Last September, President Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. claimed that women using acetaminophen, best known as the brand name drug Tylenol, during pregnancy could be raising their children's risk of autism. Many outside scientists quickly denounced the claim as based on weak evidence. Research out this week, however, shows at least some doctors and pregnant women have since heeded Trump's warning to stay away from the over-the-counter pain and fever medication.
Scientists studied the medical records of people across the U.S. who visited emergency departments or outpatient clinics last year. They found the use of acetaminophen among pregnant women in the ER dropped following the Trump announcement. Meanwhile, prescriptions of leucovorin for children, a drug now touted as an autism treatment by the White House with little supporting data, rose during the same time.
“Although causal claims cannot be made, the observed associations are consistent with influence of new FDA recommendations on clinical decisions,” the authors wrote in their paper, published Thursday in the Lancet.
RFK Jr. and other health officials have been somewhat restrained in blaming acetaminophen (widely called paracetamol outside of the U.S.) for autism, noting that more research is needed to show a causative link. Trump certainly hasn't been, though. At the September press conference, he repeatedly told women to immediately stop using acetaminophen, even yelling at times. The administration has also stated it would soon take regulatory action, such as adding a warning label to acetaminophen products.
Some studies have suggested a possible link between maternal acetaminophen use and autism, but many others haven't. Two recent reviews of the data, including one published this January, have failed to find compelling evidence for any cause-and-effect connection. Given Trump's bully pulpit, though, and his enduring popularity among a segment of the country, it's certainly possible that some people listened to his advice.
New Research Debunks Trump and RFK Jr.'s Claims Linking Tylenol to Autism
The study researchers examined data from Cosmos, a database representing over 200 million patient records collected from health care systems in the U.S. and other countries. They focused on U.S. patient data in the three months before and after the September autism announcement, looking at orders of acetaminophen for pregnant women in the ER. They also tracked outpatient prescriptions of leucovorin, a drug that Trump and health officials first endorsed as a treatment for autism at the September announcement.
Following Trump's declaration, ER orders for acetaminophen among pregnant women dropped by about 10%, the researchers found. Acetaminophen orders didn't decrease among non-pregnant women, nor did orders for opioids, supporting the idea that this diktat only affected the maternal use of acetaminophen. They also found that outpatient prescriptions of leucovorin increased by 71% relative to before the Trump announcement.
Of course, acetaminophen is widely taken outside the ER, so it's still unclear how its use in general might have changed nationwide. The researchers also note their study can't tell us how much of this change is due to pregnant women turning down the drug as opposed to doctors deciding to not order it for their pregnant patients.
“[N]onetheless, they show the apparent power that public authority figures have to drive sudden changes in health-care practices,” they wrote.
What RFK Jr.'s Unproven Autism Treatment Could Mean for Autistic Patients and Their Families
There is perhaps some good news. ER orders for acetaminophen began to rise from late November into early December, the researchers found. It's possible, then, the Trump effect waned over time, especially as more and more health organizations denounced the autism link. That said, the winter is also cold and flu season, so the increased orders may only reflect a seasonal trend.
Obviously, more study is needed to know how the Trump announcement may have changed maternal acetaminophen use in the U.S. But should it continue to dip, it could have serious long-term ramifications for the health of women and their children, the researchers say.
“There are multiple potential consequences from these changes, including higher incidence of untreated fevers (a risk factor for neurological disorders) and use of antipyretic or analgesic medications that are less safe in pregnancy than paracetamol, which is safe to use during pregnancy,” they wrote.
Explore more on these topics
Share this story
Subscribe and interact with our community, get up to date with our customised Newsletters and much more.
Even when your power goes down, your Wi-Fi won't.
"The future of American innovation in AI, the rule of law, and the constitutional boundaries of executive power are all on the line, and they are yours to defend."
The health secretary recently announced his plans to have companies like Dunkin' Donuts prove their foods are safe to eat.
"The machinery of our current republic seems to be in such disrepair that it is hard to see how it lasts," writes Dean Ball.
A federal judge just ruled against the Trump administration.
RFK Jr. plans to reverse a sweeping compounding ban of certain peptides issued by the FDA in late 2023.
©2026 GIZMODO USA LLC.
All rights reserved.
Reading time 2 minutes
Cinephiles have been champing at the bit for the theatrical release of Ryan Gosling‘s upcoming space movie, Project Hail Mary. And who can blame them, with the likes of Phil Lord and Chris Miller directing a sci-fi flick as well as some good-ass practical effects, it's pretty much a movie lover's wish upon a star. As if to send folks off into the weekend with even more hype for the film before it's at the end of the month, MGM dropped an official clip from the movie to both satiate fans' appetites and leave them craving more.
Based on Andy Weir's novel, Project Hail Mary follows Ryland Grace, a school teacher-turned-supremely underqualified astronaut. To make matters all the more perilous, the dude wakes up in deep space with amnesia only to come to the slow realization that he's been tasked with saving the world from cosmic doom.
While many a moviegoer who saw the first trailer for Project Hail Mary scratched their heads, wondering why they put a big spoiler at the end revealing Ryland would come into contact with some sort of alien. Turns out, dear reader, that is what the movie is really about: their friendship. So, to further hammer that point home, here's an extensive clip from the movie of Ryland meeting Rocky, a little rock alien guy.
Ryland and Rocky's meet-cute is, well, cute. The clip shows Rocky's little rover-shaped claws peeking out of rubble beyond the wall separating the two, revealing a little figurine we can safely assume he made of Ryland. But like a kid showing off his toys, the show's not quite over yet, because Rocky also pulls out a metal clump shaped like a four that Ryland gives us a huge assist in ascertaining what the hell it's supposed to be, saying it's his ship. Rocky then concludes his impromptu prop show by pantomiming his Ryland figure waddling back into the ship, even though he apparently just got here. But no worries, Ryland meekly says he'll see Rocky again, like how Elmo would tell kids at the end of Sesame Street.
As mentioned up top, folks have been abuzz about Project Hail Mary. So much so that critics' first reactions were glowing. Among their praises, critics found the weird sci-fi film incredibly touching, funny, innovative, and they even threw around the word “masterpiece.” After seeing 30 minutes of the film at a special screening, io9's own Germain Lussier was blown away, saying it was “pure joy.”
Of course, it doesn't hurt that the movie will be in IMAX, giving fans an eyeful of its hypnotic visuals and booming score. But the rest of us regular folk will have to hold on to this clip (and any others they might drip-feed us) and play pretend with Lego sets before we can see what all the buzz is about for ourselves.
Project Hail Mary releases in theaters on March 20.
Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what's next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.
Explore more on these topics
Share this story
Subscribe and interact with our community, get up to date with our customised Newsletters and much more.
Even when your power goes down, your Wi-Fi won't.
'Project Hail Mary' directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller were previously attached to direct 'Artemis,' which came after Weir's 'The Martian.'
Directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller wanted to balance CGI effects with real sets and physical elements as much as possible.
The 'Project Hail Mary' star has, for the most part, avoided large franchises. That changes with 2027's 'Star Wars: Starfighter.'
io9 spoke to directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller and star Ryan Gosling about the cool Lego set.
Ryan Gosling stars in the Andy Weir sci-fi adaptation, in theaters March 20.
©2026 GIZMODO USA LLC.
All rights reserved.
What happens here matters everywhere
by Kurt Schlosser on Mar 6, 2026 at 7:51 amMarch 6, 2026 at 7:51 am
Washington state legislators approved a bill to ban employers from requiring or pressuring workers to be microchipped, aiming to prohibit the practice before it ever becomes an issue.
HB 2303 was unanimously passed by the Senate this week. The House of Representatives passed the legislation 87-6 last month. If Gov. Bob Ferguson signs the legislation, Washington would become the 14th state to pass such a law.
The bill prohibits employers from requiring, requesting or coercing employees to have microchips implanted in their bodies as a condition of employment, and would bar the use of subcutaneous tracking or identification technology for workplace management or surveillance.
“We are getting out ahead of the problem because the practice of requiring these chips is too dangerous to wait for it to show up in Washington,” Reps. Brianna Thomas (D-34) previously told GeekWire. “An employee with a microchip stops being an employee — they are essentially being dehumanized into corporate equipment.”
HB 2303 would add a new section to Chapter 49.44 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), titled “Violations — Prohibited Practices.” The chapter serves as a catch-all for labor regulations that define and prohibit specific unfair or illegal activities by employers, employees, and labor representatives.
The legislation is similar to laws passed in Arkansas, California, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah, Wisconsin, Indiana, Alabama, and Mississippi.
The Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs reported that internationally, more than 50,000 people have elected to receive microchip implants to serve as their swipe keys, credit cards, and more. The organization noted that the technology is especially popular in Sweden, where chip implants are more widely accepted for gym access, e-tickets on transit systems, and to store emergency contact information.
Previously:
Microsoft's mission: empowering every person and organization on the planet to achieve more.
Learn how Microsoft is thinking about responsible artificial intelligence, regulation, sustainability, and fundamental rights. See the latest news and updates on these and other issues that matter the most at Microsoft on the Issues.
Click for more about underwritten and sponsored content on GeekWire.
Washington state lawmakers target data center sales tax breaks to help plug $2B budget gap
Washington state bill allowing direct sales of Rivian and Lucid is speeding toward finish line
Washington state's data center regulation bill fails following pushback from tech industry
Subscribe to GeekWire's free newsletters to catch every headline
Have a scoop that you'd like GeekWire to cover? Let us know.
Microchipped at work? Washington state bill aims to ban employers from using ‘dehumanizing' tech
AI bargaining bill returns as Washington lawmakers weigh new rules for public employers
Washington state bill targets private real estate listings and would require some public marketing
Proposed income tax on high earners advances in Washington state
Catch every headline in your inbox
Reading time 2 minutes
The Doctor Who spinoff Disney is still refusing to broadcast despite helping to pay for it, The War Between the Land and the Sea, is not very good. It's not very good for a lot of reasons, but one of them in particular is that, for a show called The War Between the Land and the Sea that has a lot of characters talk about a war occurring between the land and the sea, it barely ever actually shows a conflict between the land and the sea. But that was apparently not always going to be the case.
Speaking recently at the Gallifrey One convention in Los Angeles, series co-showrunner Peter McTighe (via Cultbox) described a scene cut from an early moment in the show, as tensions between humanity and Aquakind (the show's modernized term for the Sea Devils) begin to escalate.
“There was only one big effects sequence that we ended up having to cut which was from the start of Episode 2, which was going to open in this beautiful restaurant on the Italian coast,” McTighe explained. “This young, hot couple were arriving in a sports car and then went into this amazing restaurant that had glass view of the sea that was beautiful. They sit down and he was going to propose to her and say he loves her and then suddenly, a squid was going to slap onto the window. And they were like, ‘Sorry, what was that?' And then another one would spat onto the other window and then another one, another one. And suddenly, there were all these squid attacking this restaurant and the windows exploded!”
McTighe went on to explain that the sequence was ultimately cut to save visual FX budgets for the same episode's climax, which saw Aquakind representative Salt (played by Gugu Mbatha-Raw) ceremoniously dump every piece of waterborne trash dumped by humankind back onto land—a dramatic set piece actually important to War Between‘s overall story (even if the show ultimately shunts cleanup and response to the massive logistical issues of such an event into the background for the remainder of its run).
It makes sense as a budgetary cut in that regard, but it's also a shame because it would've been one of the rare moments of tit-for-tat skirmishing between human and aquakind the show would've actually had, and would've helped actually communicate the growing escalation in conflict between the two sides as part of the supposed war that was meant to be happening in the background of the show's ultimate interest, a Shape of Water-type relationship between Salt and lead negotiator Barclay (Russell Tovey).
Alas, it wasn't to be. At least the last episode opens with an implication that Aquakind lures, captures, and eats every dog on the planet off-screen instead? Yeah.
The War Between the Land and the Sea is now streaming in its entirety in the UK on BBC iPlayer. The series is still expected to stream on Disney+ internationally at some point in 2026.
Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what's next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.
Explore more on these topics
Share this story
Subscribe and interact with our community, get up to date with our customised Newsletters and much more.
Even when your power goes down, your Wi-Fi won't.
The famous memorial to Gareth David-Lloyd's fallen 'Torchwood' character Ianto Jones in Cardiff Bay will be no more as of next month.
Unsurprisingly, most actors want to know what they're signing up for before making a long-term (or short-term) commitment.
Inspired by the rival Epic Universe, Disney's Villains Land is reportedly becoming a little less evil.
The BBC's Lindsay Salt called the show a 'treasured brand' and is open to another collaboration even after its Disney drama.
Plus, somehow, 'Charlie's Angels' returned?
©2026 GIZMODO USA LLC.
All rights reserved.
Reading time 4 minutes
With about a month left until the April 15 deadline for filing taxes, you may be tempted to pawn off the task onto an AI chatbot. After all, companies keep saying they are more capable than ever of autonomously handling tasks like coding apps or, you know, bombing military targets. Surely, they can handle navigating the American tax code…right?
James Burnham, xAI's General Counsel and head of law and government, sure thinks so. In a post on X, he told his followers, “Doublecheck your taxes with @Grok. A friend had Grok doublecheck TurboTax and it increased her tax refund by $1400. That covers nearly four years of Grok Premium!” (He later edited the post to add, “Disclaimer: This/Grok is not tax advice so always confirm yourself too.”)
Setting aside the fact that you can absolutely find better things to do with your money than getting nearly a half-decade's worth of access to the MechaHitler machine, and the fact that Burnham isn't even citing his own experience, just passing on the account of a friend, there's a logic to assuming a chatbot can help you with taxes. Even tax giants like H&R Block have introduced AI assistants designed to tackle tax-related questions. But that doesn't mean you should just pass your W2 or 1099s over to Grok or your chatbot of choice and let them fill out the forms for you.
In fact, tax experts would really rather you not do this—after all, they're probably the ones who are going to have to help you roll back all the mistakes. “I haven't personally used Grok to prepare or review tax returns, and I wouldn't advise taxpayers to [try it], especially using a general-purpose chatbot as a tax reviewer,” Joel Salas, owner of Elevated Tax Strategies, told Gizmodo. “Practically speaking, that's just not a good idea.”
There are several reasons not to trust the Groks of the world to roleplay as your Certified Public Accountant. The first is accuracy. The New York Times put multiple chatbots through the paces of filing taxes, handing them tax situations prepared as training materials by tax preparation company TaxSlayer. It found that the chatbots miscalculated refunds and amounts owed to the IRS by an average of more than $2,000. So sure, Grok might have saved Burnham's friend $1,400 on paper, but who knows if it arrived at that number because it found some hidden exemptions or because it just made stuff up and entered numbers incorrectly.
Those findings are backed up by other tests, too. TaxCalcBench, a benchmarking test designed to evaluate an AI model's ability to calculate tax returns, found that most options are wildly insufficient, with most failing to even crack 50% accuracy across a full return.
“Tax preparation in particular requires purpose-built systems designed for accuracy, compliance, reliability, and security,” a spokesperson for tax and finance software giant Intuit told Gizmodo. “Consumers are looking for confidence and peace of mind in moments that carry real financial liability. While a general-purpose LLM may provide broad tax information, it is not specifically trained or validated to prepare accurate tax returns across complex federal and state scenarios.”
The second reason not to use a bot to do your taxes, Salas said, is that it's just irrational to trust your average chatbot with the type of sensitive personal information that is contained in your tax documents. “Honestly, it hasn't been around long enough for us to trust these companies with that type of data. If you review any of their terms and conditions and fully understand them, you'll realize you're playing a bit of Russian roulette with your data,” he said. “Your data can be used for other purposes if you do not opt out or take certain actions.”
Last year, researchers at Stanford analyzed privacy policies of major AI chatbots and found that many of the leading US companies feed user inputs back into their models to improve their capabilities. Companies, including Anthropic, OpenAI, and xAI, require users to manually opt out of allowing their conversations to be used for training purposes. Meta previously allowed users to browse other people's prompts and conversations with its chatbot, revealing medical, legal, and other sensitive information. A similar situation happened with xAI, which temporarily made user conversations with Grok publicly visible and searchable.
It's also no secret that xAI and its founder, Elon Musk, have been after taxpayer data for a while now. The Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency reportedly sought to access sensitive taxpayer data at the IRS last year. It'd certainly make their lives much easier if people just willingly handed that information over, which Musk encouraged them to do, stating on Twitter, “Grok can help with your taxes.”
If you do want to use AI to help with filing your taxes, there are tools out there that are better suited than Grok. Salas pointed to the tool Taxbox, which he said can be used as a “tax assistant or tutor” to better understand what different documents mean and how to navigate the filing system. He even said that you can use a chatbot to do things like build a checklist of common tax mistakes or ask some tax basics as you go through the filing process. Just don't give them your actual documents.
“The risk arises when copying and pasting W-2s, 1099s, or draft returns directly into the internet bot and asking it to check them,” Salas said. “The bot can not only be confidently wrong, but you are also relinquishing personal data.” When it comes to actually filing, just stick to the software designed specifically for the task. “The actual form logic, calculation, and e-file validation are built into the tax software. They're not built into the chatbot,” Salas said. And if you end up getting audited, your chatbot isn't going to be able to help you.
Intuit, which obviously has its own motivations for driving consumers to its services, offered similar advice. “General large language models can be helpful tools for general education and guidance, including answering high-level financial or tax questions,” a spokesperson said. But, they specified, “AI can absolutely play a valuable role in financial decision-making, but when it comes to high-stakes matters like taxes, consumers should look for solutions that are purpose-built, secure, and designed to deliver accuracy at scale.”
And if you don't believe the experts, you can always ask Grok. When asked on Twitter about its ability to file taxes, the chatbot told users, “I'm not a licensed tax pro or official software, so no—don't ‘do' your taxes solely with me.” You heard the bot.
Explore more on these topics
Share this story
Subscribe and interact with our community, get up to date with our customised Newsletters and much more.
Even when your power goes down, your Wi-Fi won't.
Being an international software giant with singular loyalty to Donald Trump is an impossible mission.
Maybe it really is the dawning of the Chinese Century.
The latest model is supposed to be a big step forward for AI agents.
The president doesn't think too highly of dogs... or Anthropic.
"The future of American innovation in AI, the rule of law, and the constitutional boundaries of executive power are all on the line, and they are yours to defend."
©2026 GIZMODO USA LLC.
All rights reserved.
The M3 Ultra's top memory tier is gone, and the next one down just got $400 more expensive.
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Apple quietly removed the 512GB RAM upgrade option from the Mac Studio this week, capping the M3 Ultra configuration at 256GB, MacRumors reported on Thursday. At the same time, Apple raised the price of the 96GB-to-256GB upgrade from $1,600 to $2,000, and delivery estimates for 256GB configurations have slipped to May.
The Mac Studio starts at 36GB RAM, with upgrade tiers ranging from 48GB up to — until this week — 512GB. The 512GB option, which was exclusive to the M3 Ultra chip and previously cost $4,000, no longer appears on Apple's configuration page. Apple has not commented publicly on the change, but the company's rationale will inevitably link back to the ongoing memory shortage, which has sent commodity prices to record highs and constrained supply across the industry.
TrendForce revised its Q1 2026 DRAM contract price forecast in February to a 90-95% quarter-over-quarter increase, up from an earlier estimate of 55-60%. Meanwhile, combined DRAM and SSD prices will surge 130% this year, according to a recent forecast published by Gartner, which will drive global PC shipments down 10.4%.
All this is happening because memory manufacturers have reallocated production capacity toward high-bandwidth memory, the specialized memory stacked inside AI accelerators from Nvidia and others. HBM consumes roughly three times the wafer capacity of conventional DDR5, so every wafer diverted to AI accelerators removes three bits' worth of standard DRAM from the market. TrendForce does not expect meaningful relief before 2027 or 2028, when new fab capacity comes online.
Apple has generally fared better than most OEMs struggling with the memory shortage. The company is understood to have secured long-term DRAM supply agreements extending through Q1 2026, giving it more allocation certainty than Android manufacturers or PC vendors working on shorter procurement cycles, but CEO Tim Cook has acknowledged that the shortage will have a greater impact on Apple's Q2 earnings.
The fact that the 512GB tier has disappeared regardless of this suggests that ultra-high-density memory is facing particular scarcity even for major buyers like Apple. MacRumors also noted that demand for high-memory Mac Studio configurations has increased as users look for machines capable of running large language models locally, which could be a contributing factor to the extended May shipping estimates on 256GB builds.
The timing of this also compounds an already awkward situation for Mac Studio buyers. The current lineup pairs the M4 Max with the older M3 Ultra, a cross-generation mismatch that came about because Apple skipped the M4 Ultra entirely, as the M4 Max lacks the UltraFusion connector needed to fuse two dies. Anyone configuring the top-end M3 Ultra model right now is paying a $4,000 premium for a chip Apple has already moved past.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Apple is also expected to release M5 Max and M5 Ultra versions of the Mac Studio later in 2026, though no release window has been confirmed. Whether the 512GB tier returns with that update will depend on whether DRAM supply conditions improve enough to make high-density memory available at scale, but that's not looking likely.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Luke James is a freelance writer and journalist. Although his background is in legal, he has a personal interest in all things tech, especially hardware and microelectronics, and anything regulatory.
Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.
©
Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street,
New York,
NY 10036.
Founder Summit 2026 in Boston: Don't miss ticket savings of up to $300. Register Now.
Save up to $680 on your Disrupt 2026 pass. Ends 11:59 p.m. PT tonight. REGISTER NOW.
Latest
AI
Amazon
Apps
Biotech & Health
Climate
Cloud Computing
Commerce
Crypto
Enterprise
EVs
Fintech
Fundraising
Gadgets
Gaming
Google
Government & Policy
Hardware
Instagram
Layoffs
Media & Entertainment
Meta
Microsoft
Privacy
Robotics
Security
Social
Space
Startups
TikTok
Transportation
Venture
Staff
Events
Startup Battlefield
StrictlyVC
Newsletters
Podcasts
Videos
Partner Content
TechCrunch Brand Studio
Crunchboard
Contact Us
Health tech giant TriZetto has confirmed that more than 3.4 million people's personal and health information was stolen in a 2024 cyberattack, which the company failed to detect for almost a year.
The tech company, owned by multinational conglomerate Cognizant, serves around 200 million people across 875,000 healthcare providers throughout the U.S., according to its website. Doctors' offices and healthcare providers use TriZetto to assess patients' insurance for medical treatments.
TriZetto said in a filing with Maine's attorney general on Friday that hackers stole patients' insurance eligibility transaction reports from the company's servers.
The data includes personal information like patients' names, dates of birth, home addresses, and Social Security numbers, as well as information about their healthcare, such as their provider's name, demographic data, and health and insurance details.
TriZetto said it identified the breach on October 2, 2025, but later discovered that the hackers had access as far back as November 2024.
Cognizant spokesperson William Abelson said the company “eliminated the threat” to its environment, but would not say why it took the company a year to detect the breach.
Several organizations have confirmed that their patients' information was compromised in the cyberattack. One of these is OCHIN, a nonprofit consultancy firm that provides healthcare technology to some 300 rural and community care providers across the United States. Other healthcare providers across California have also confirmed.
According to TriZetto, not every customer was affected by the breach.
TriZetto is the latest major health tech company to confirm a hack in recent years.
In 2024, a ransomware attack at Change Healthcare, another health tech giant that processes some 15 billion healthcare transactions, allowed hackers to make off with more than 192 million patient files. The cyberattack sparked outages across the U.S., leaving many without access to medical treatments or medications.
Updated with comment from Cognizant.
Topics
Security Editor
Zack Whittaker is the security editor at TechCrunch. He also authors the weekly cybersecurity newsletter, this week in security.
He can be reached via encrypted message at zackwhittaker.1337 on Signal. You can also contact him by email, or to verify outreach, at zack.whittaker@techcrunch.com.
Actively scaling? Fundraising? Planning your next launch?TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026 delivers tactical playbooks and direct access to 1,000+ founders and investors who are building, backing, and closing.Register by March 13 to save up to $300.
Cluely CEO Roy Lee admits to publicly lying about revenue numbers last year
Jensen Huang says Nvidia is pulling back from OpenAI and Anthropic, but his explanation raises more questions than it answers
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calls OpenAI's messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies,' report says
ChatGPT uninstalls surged by 295% after DoD deal
MyFitnessPal has acquired Cal AI, the viral calorie app built by teens
Anthropic's Claude reports widespread outage
The trap Anthropic built for itself
© 2026 TechCrunch Media LLC.
Sure, the junior manager might use them vaguely to mimic, but IMHO, when vague language comes up at decision tables, it's usually coding something more precise in a sort of plausible deniability.A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.A senior director talks about better alignment of their various depts: We need to cut fat and merge, start identifying your bad playersetc etc.If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.A senior director talks about better alignment of their various depts: We need to cut fat and merge, start identifying your bad playersetc etc.If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
A senior director talks about better alignment of their various depts: We need to cut fat and merge, start identifying your bad playersetc etc.If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
etc etc.If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
reply
reply
> “Corporate bullshit is a specific style of communication that uses confusing, abstract buzzwords in a functionally misleading way,” said Littrell, a postdoctoral researcher in the College of Arts and Sciences. “Unlike technical jargon, which can sometimes make office communication a little easier, corporate bullshit confuses rather than clarifies. It may sound impressive, but it is semantically empty.”I'm taking issue with "semantically empty" and saying they're actually semantically rich, but they are coded signals. Coded signals become increasingly indistinguishable from noise.
I'm taking issue with "semantically empty" and saying they're actually semantically rich, but they are coded signals. Coded signals become increasingly indistinguishable from noise.
reply
So by using such a phrase, underlings signal both how close they are to bigwigs by knowing such a phrase first, and also demonstrate a vote for alignement, by quoting some phrases more and others less. Bigwigs raise status of underlings by repeating and expressing interest in their new phrases.These phrases come and go in waves. Underlings laughing with them basically signal they are not worthy of attention in the political melee.
These phrases come and go in waves. Underlings laughing with them basically signal they are not worthy of attention in the political melee.
reply
On the rare occasions I've used it sincerely in meetings I've always caveated it with some variation of "the real meaning, not the BS one." This never seems to work so I've just dropped it from my verbal lexicon altogether.
reply
No individual holds power over connotations. Language just evolves.
reply
Okay, but I still reserve the right to be pissed off at teenagers using 'out of pocket' when they mean 'off the wall' or 'out of bounds'.
reply
reply
reply
When you put enough bafflegab around it, you can almost ignore that you said something unpleasant. Because the part of our brains that processes for emotional content, doesn't process complex language very well. Hence the example with ten paragraphs of complexity to hide the pain of a major lay-off.After I noticed this, I found that I did this. I reliably use complex language when I don't like what I'm saying. So much so that I could use readability checkers to find discomfort that I was not aware that I had!And I'm not the only one to notice this. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpVtJNv4ZNM for George Carlin's famous skit on how the honesty of the phrase "shell shock" over time got softened over time to "post-traumatic stress disorder". A phrase that can be understood, but no longer felt.Corporations have just developed their own special complex language for this. And you're right. It is emotionally dishonest. That's why they do it.
After I noticed this, I found that I did this. I reliably use complex language when I don't like what I'm saying. So much so that I could use readability checkers to find discomfort that I was not aware that I had!And I'm not the only one to notice this. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpVtJNv4ZNM for George Carlin's famous skit on how the honesty of the phrase "shell shock" over time got softened over time to "post-traumatic stress disorder". A phrase that can be understood, but no longer felt.Corporations have just developed their own special complex language for this. And you're right. It is emotionally dishonest. That's why they do it.
And I'm not the only one to notice this. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpVtJNv4ZNM for George Carlin's famous skit on how the honesty of the phrase "shell shock" over time got softened over time to "post-traumatic stress disorder". A phrase that can be understood, but no longer felt.Corporations have just developed their own special complex language for this. And you're right. It is emotionally dishonest. That's why they do it.
Corporations have just developed their own special complex language for this. And you're right. It is emotionally dishonest. That's why they do it.
reply
reply
You _want_ most ICs to ignore a negative message that doesn't involve them, and you _want_ to give middle / lower managers the discretion to address an ICs "nonsynergistic" contributions on their own time. It's a signal not a prescription. This allows a public person to make a public statement and set direction without prescribing actions so lower management and ICs can do their thing.Upper management becomes increasingly vibes-based, from what I can tell.
Upper management becomes increasingly vibes-based, from what I can tell.
reply
This sort of management is dysfunctional even in it's premises.
reply
Sure, direct, cold, concrete, public data is "best" in the objective sense, but people's feelings and pride matter, and any attempt to wave that away is just naive.
reply
reply
QED.
reply
As with all forms of cynicism, it has a grain of truth. And a much larger grain of truth than is comfortable.
reply
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/book-review-the-gervais-pri...
reply
reply
What's specifically interesting about corpo-speak though is it's one of the only version of this (at least that I know of) where it's main purpose is to be euphemistic. In most other fields, the coded language is meant to be more descriptive to the in-group. In management, the coded language is designed to be less descriptive on purpose to avoid the human cost of the decision.It's dystopian because it follows the same patterns as military language, and serves the same purpose to sanitize unpleasant realities. "Neutralize the target" in military lingo, "Right-size" in corpo-speak. In both cases, the human at the end is stripped of their humanity into a target or resource to be managed (or killed).
It's dystopian because it follows the same patterns as military language, and serves the same purpose to sanitize unpleasant realities. "Neutralize the target" in military lingo, "Right-size" in corpo-speak. In both cases, the human at the end is stripped of their humanity into a target or resource to be managed (or killed).
reply
reply
Pretty shocking belief when you're of courseing all "ICs".If it was inevitable than the amount and degree of corporate BS would've been stable over the last 5 decades, and across countries and languages.In reality, it has been anything but, instead showing massive differences across both.
If it was inevitable than the amount and degree of corporate BS would've been stable over the last 5 decades, and across countries and languages.In reality, it has been anything but, instead showing massive differences across both.
In reality, it has been anything but, instead showing massive differences across both.
reply
And there's blatant bullshit, like paradigm shift, culture building, and so on.Two categories of execspeak.
Two categories of execspeak.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
The day the layoffs take your job (but not your officemate's) might be a good day to learn how to read the corporate signals.
reply
Early in my career, I hated, and I do mean despised people who used the term "value".And then, one day when my colleague suggested migrating all our servers from windows to Linux but couldn't for the life of them articulate what that would do for the business / client, it started clicking. A lot of us talk about effort, activities, tasks, accomplishments. I did this, Bob did that, Fatime did the other thing. At some level of management, "value" is the well understood shorthand for "when we follow the chain of benefits, what does this actually do for the client / business?". Its their job (when done well) to ensure technical tasks contribute to business value.And we could be upset that they are inventing weird jargon for no clear reason, but then spend a minute explaining "garbage collection" etc as a term of art, and realize that pots are calling kettle black and all that - nobody has weird jargon like IT techies :->
And then, one day when my colleague suggested migrating all our servers from windows to Linux but couldn't for the life of them articulate what that would do for the business / client, it started clicking. A lot of us talk about effort, activities, tasks, accomplishments. I did this, Bob did that, Fatime did the other thing. At some level of management, "value" is the well understood shorthand for "when we follow the chain of benefits, what does this actually do for the client / business?". Its their job (when done well) to ensure technical tasks contribute to business value.And we could be upset that they are inventing weird jargon for no clear reason, but then spend a minute explaining "garbage collection" etc as a term of art, and realize that pots are calling kettle black and all that - nobody has weird jargon like IT techies :->
And we could be upset that they are inventing weird jargon for no clear reason, but then spend a minute explaining "garbage collection" etc as a term of art, and realize that pots are calling kettle black and all that - nobody has weird jargon like IT techies :->
reply
reply
"We will actualize a renewed level of cradle-to-grave credentialing" is an example from the article - you can't actualize a level, you can't renew a level either. And "cradle-to-grave credentialing" is at best a bad way to describe some real concept. It's word-salad from start to finish. It's not coded language, it's bullshit.
reply
Yep. I'm a director now. This is exactly how it is. A big part of being effective in this role is understanding how direct you can be in a given scenario.A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.Option 1 is how I'd say it to a peer whose org is duplicating effort. You can give your advice, but at the end of the day: not my circus, not my clowns.Option 2 is a more-direct way of how I'd say it to someone in my own org. I'd rephrase to: "Someone else is already doing this; focus your efforts on something more impactful."
A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.Option 1 is how I'd say it to a peer whose org is duplicating effort. You can give your advice, but at the end of the day: not my circus, not my clowns.Option 2 is a more-direct way of how I'd say it to someone in my own org. I'd rephrase to: "Someone else is already doing this; focus your efforts on something more impactful."
Option 1 is how I'd say it to a peer whose org is duplicating effort. You can give your advice, but at the end of the day: not my circus, not my clowns.Option 2 is a more-direct way of how I'd say it to someone in my own org. I'd rephrase to: "Someone else is already doing this; focus your efforts on something more impactful."
Option 2 is a more-direct way of how I'd say it to someone in my own org. I'd rephrase to: "Someone else is already doing this; focus your efforts on something more impactful."
reply
Then came PowerPoint.Before that it was more of a political and religious style of communication. In those areas, speeches and texts designed to be popular but not commit to much dominate.
Religious texts are notorious for their ambiguity.The point seems to be to express authority without taking responsibility.[1] https://www.rivier.edu/academics/blog-posts/circling-back-on...
Before that it was more of a political and religious style of communication. In those areas, speeches and texts designed to be popular but not commit to much dominate.
Religious texts are notorious for their ambiguity.The point seems to be to express authority without taking responsibility.[1] https://www.rivier.edu/academics/blog-posts/circling-back-on...
The point seems to be to express authority without taking responsibility.[1] https://www.rivier.edu/academics/blog-posts/circling-back-on...
[1] https://www.rivier.edu/academics/blog-posts/circling-back-on...
reply
https://brightpath-global-solutions.com/Edit: repo link: https://github.com/chronick/global-business-solutions
Edit: repo link: https://github.com/chronick/global-business-solutions
reply
It got mentioned in WSJ of all places as news of it spread.For the history+app from its creator, see:https://lurkertech.com/buzzword-bingo/(Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzzword_bingo )I'm glad to see, 25-30 years later, the hackers/cynical-tech-workers who birthed it getting justified by actual social science research.
For the history+app from its creator, see:https://lurkertech.com/buzzword-bingo/(Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzzword_bingo )I'm glad to see, 25-30 years later, the hackers/cynical-tech-workers who birthed it getting justified by actual social science research.
https://lurkertech.com/buzzword-bingo/(Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzzword_bingo )I'm glad to see, 25-30 years later, the hackers/cynical-tech-workers who birthed it getting justified by actual social science research.
(Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzzword_bingo )I'm glad to see, 25-30 years later, the hackers/cynical-tech-workers who birthed it getting justified by actual social science research.
I'm glad to see, 25-30 years later, the hackers/cynical-tech-workers who birthed it getting justified by actual social science research.
reply
https://www.corporate-ipsum.com/
reply
reply
reply
That's always the line you're listening for. Everything before that is bullshit, everything after is trying to justify the new product for that one change.In favor of preferable outcomes of operational excellence as part of our customer success. Barf.
In favor of preferable outcomes of operational excellence as part of our customer success. Barf.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
We are undoing much of this progress by now insisting everything be expressed in natural language for a machine to translate on our behalf, like a tour guide.The natives will continue to speak amongst themselves in their mother tongue.
The natives will continue to speak amongst themselves in their mother tongue.
reply
It is awfully unproductive way to do it but I'm sure HR approves.
reply
reply
Corporate speak as a signalling mechanism is only effective among the "clueless" in the Gervais model. If any CEO tried to talk 1:1 to a competent board member that way, they would lose all credibility. Once you've operated at a certain level you get it>a system for turning bullshit into parse errors.This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corporate speak. It's deliberately vague as a way to navigate uncertainty while still projecting authority and avoiding accountability in settings like a town hall, large meeting etc. Which is not to be read as a necessarily "bad" thing. No one wants a micromanaging CEO. They have to set vision and direction while leaving space for it top be executed by all the layers under them
>a system for turning bullshit into parse errors.This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corporate speak. It's deliberately vague as a way to navigate uncertainty while still projecting authority and avoiding accountability in settings like a town hall, large meeting etc. Which is not to be read as a necessarily "bad" thing. No one wants a micromanaging CEO. They have to set vision and direction while leaving space for it top be executed by all the layers under them
This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corporate speak. It's deliberately vague as a way to navigate uncertainty while still projecting authority and avoiding accountability in settings like a town hall, large meeting etc. Which is not to be read as a necessarily "bad" thing. No one wants a micromanaging CEO. They have to set vision and direction while leaving space for it top be executed by all the layers under them
reply
A prime example of corporate speak that is, as you rightly said, 'only effective among the "clueless"'
reply
This also holds true for competent non-board members. I have interacted with C-level executives at fortune 100 companies, as well as smaller businesses. It is almost impressive how quickly they can switch in and out of corporate bullshit mode. I think it's what the kids call code-switching.In general, once they trust you a bit, and they know someone isn't listening they talk like a normal person. Then you ask a difficult question about the business and the corporate-speak kicks in like a security sub routine trying to prevent them from saying the wrong thing.I have also met some that seemingly calculate their tone and cadence to try to manipulate the person(s)/people(s) they're talking to. It's fascinating when you catch them doing it, and it's different than simply matching like a chameleon. For example, they may use an authoritative tone with younger people, a kind but subtly threatening tone with anxious people, and a buddybuddy tone with a plumber or someone they know isn't going to put up with any bullshit.I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.
In general, once they trust you a bit, and they know someone isn't listening they talk like a normal person. Then you ask a difficult question about the business and the corporate-speak kicks in like a security sub routine trying to prevent them from saying the wrong thing.I have also met some that seemingly calculate their tone and cadence to try to manipulate the person(s)/people(s) they're talking to. It's fascinating when you catch them doing it, and it's different than simply matching like a chameleon. For example, they may use an authoritative tone with younger people, a kind but subtly threatening tone with anxious people, and a buddybuddy tone with a plumber or someone they know isn't going to put up with any bullshit.I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.
I have also met some that seemingly calculate their tone and cadence to try to manipulate the person(s)/people(s) they're talking to. It's fascinating when you catch them doing it, and it's different than simply matching like a chameleon. For example, they may use an authoritative tone with younger people, a kind but subtly threatening tone with anxious people, and a buddybuddy tone with a plumber or someone they know isn't going to put up with any bullshit.I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.
I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.
reply
It's some combination of what they call "self monitoring" in social psychology, plus general EQ and Machiavellian personality traits that allow people to read the room and adjust their tone, speaking style, word choice (including picking up in-group lingo quickly), posture etc to be most effective given the setting. This applies to basically any social environment, and is often a frustrating reality to many people who may be extremely competent but see others around them who are obviously less competent "getting ahead" through social acumen, office politics etc.This has been studied among MBA graduates, Do Chameleons Get Ahead, The Effects of Self-Monitoring on Managerial Careers (pdf): https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/...
This has been studied among MBA graduates, Do Chameleons Get Ahead, The Effects of Self-Monitoring on Managerial Careers (pdf): https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/...
reply
It definitely takes a certain kind of person to be a good fit in that role
reply
This is a trait of a psychopath. Not surprisingly, one finds a lot of them in the executive ranks.
reply
reply
reply
Sociopaths can code-switch instantly - I wonder how much of this is training, versus emulating others, versus a fundamental difference in brain operations...
reply
reply
Social organizations require some sort of glue to bind them together. They need ways to maintain cohesion despite vagueness and to obscure (small) errors. There is a cap put upon max individual output, but aggregate output is much higher than whatever a collection of individuals could attain. This is a very basic dynamic that is lost amidst a cult of individualism that refuses to admit to any good greater than themselves.Yes - the CEO talking to the board in this way would lose credibility. But a CEO failing to deploy this jargon correctly would also lose credibility with the board : it's obvious he doesn't know how to lead.What I would like to see is a study of the ratio's between corporate speak and technical speak - and the inflection points at which too much of either causes organization ruin.
Yes - the CEO talking to the board in this way would lose credibility. But a CEO failing to deploy this jargon correctly would also lose credibility with the board : it's obvious he doesn't know how to lead.What I would like to see is a study of the ratio's between corporate speak and technical speak - and the inflection points at which too much of either causes organization ruin.
What I would like to see is a study of the ratio's between corporate speak and technical speak - and the inflection points at which too much of either causes organization ruin.
reply
Edit: seems that searching for „Gervais principle“ turned up what was talked about…
reply
reply
I (and many others) read it as "dishonesty"
reply
reply
I suspect that most people just aren't wired up that way - we have a natural tendency to want to follow leaders and what we seem to want most from leaders is certainty and confidence. Does it matter what leaders are certain and confident about - not really.
reply
reply
Let's say there are a thousand people there at the town hall. You don't want any of them to leave upset, or even concerned. But they each have different things that will make them concerned and upset. So there are maybe 10,000 tripwires out there, and you don't want to trip any of them.So you're not being dishonest, exactly. You're being nonspecific. You don't want to get down in the weeds and nail down the answer too tightly, because you may trip someone's tripwire. (And also because it would take to long.) So you say something true but not very specific.(I mean, there can be dishonesty, too, but that's a different thing. Smooth vagueness can still be honest, just unsatisfyingly vague.)
So you're not being dishonest, exactly. You're being nonspecific. You don't want to get down in the weeds and nail down the answer too tightly, because you may trip someone's tripwire. (And also because it would take to long.) So you say something true but not very specific.(I mean, there can be dishonesty, too, but that's a different thing. Smooth vagueness can still be honest, just unsatisfyingly vague.)
(I mean, there can be dishonesty, too, but that's a different thing. Smooth vagueness can still be honest, just unsatisfyingly vague.)
reply
that's a very neat way to put it!
reply
You don't need formal language (though formal languages can serve that purpose). You just need to listen like a normal human being rather than like a corporate suit, and that kind of language is just incomprehensible - a parse error. You have to work at it to make sense of that kind of language. And why I took from your first paragraph is permission to treat it as a parse error instead of as some valid message that I needed to decode.
reply
Theres no high minded difference. Its just in/out group identification.
reply
reply
reply
I look at OOP Patterns as standards and practices.The same way we have building codes for staircases the framing of walls and electrical installations to prevent injury or collapse or fire.Sure, you can dodge a lot of design pattern paradigms and still make a working application that makes money. You can also invent your own system when building your house and maybe nothing bad will happen. That tragedy hasn't yet struck does not make the building codes bad just because you got away with it.
The same way we have building codes for staircases the framing of walls and electrical installations to prevent injury or collapse or fire.Sure, you can dodge a lot of design pattern paradigms and still make a working application that makes money. You can also invent your own system when building your house and maybe nothing bad will happen. That tragedy hasn't yet struck does not make the building codes bad just because you got away with it.
Sure, you can dodge a lot of design pattern paradigms and still make a working application that makes money. You can also invent your own system when building your house and maybe nothing bad will happen. That tragedy hasn't yet struck does not make the building codes bad just because you got away with it.
reply
reply
The *concept* of patterns makes sense. A shared language that developers can use when building things.The *reality* of patterns has been much less useful. The original ones were indeed a reaction to warts in the popular languages of their era. And as we tend to do in our industry, these have been cargo culted along the way and for some reason I still see people talking about them as first class citizens 30 years later.People don't seem to realize that patterns should be and are fluid, and as our industry evolves these patterns are evolving as well. A major difference between software engineering and the analogous fields people use when talking about patterns is those industries are much older and move less quickly
The *reality* of patterns has been much less useful. The original ones were indeed a reaction to warts in the popular languages of their era. And as we tend to do in our industry, these have been cargo culted along the way and for some reason I still see people talking about them as first class citizens 30 years later.People don't seem to realize that patterns should be and are fluid, and as our industry evolves these patterns are evolving as well. A major difference between software engineering and the analogous fields people use when talking about patterns is those industries are much older and move less quickly
People don't seem to realize that patterns should be and are fluid, and as our industry evolves these patterns are evolving as well. A major difference between software engineering and the analogous fields people use when talking about patterns is those industries are much older and move less quickly
reply
reply
reply
reply
I believe C has allowed passing and returning functions from... the jump, no?
reply
reply
def addX(x: Int): Function[Int,Int] = {
y => x+y
}
addX(5) then returns a function that adds 5. So closures, which are equivalent to objects (behind the scenes, the compiler needs to allocate a structure to remember that 5 and know the "member function" to call to do the plus), and usually more straightforward.Once you get used to doing this, you realize it's useful everywhere.In a decent language with functional programming and generics support a lot of GoF patterns can be directly encoded as a simple type signature where you receive, return, or both some function, so there's not really much else to say about them. Like half of the behavioral patterns become variations of the interpreter pattern.
Once you get used to doing this, you realize it's useful everywhere.In a decent language with functional programming and generics support a lot of GoF patterns can be directly encoded as a simple type signature where you receive, return, or both some function, so there's not really much else to say about them. Like half of the behavioral patterns become variations of the interpreter pattern.
In a decent language with functional programming and generics support a lot of GoF patterns can be directly encoded as a simple type signature where you receive, return, or both some function, so there's not really much else to say about them. Like half of the behavioral patterns become variations of the interpreter pattern.
reply
reply
reply
reply
You can have your building engineered, in which case building walls out of 2x6's 16 inches on center is not off the table, but neither is a mortise and tenon timber frame with partition walls. In that paradigm, the code tries not to be descriptive of an exact technique but only gives you criteria to satisfy. For example you could run all of your electrical wiring on the outside of the walls or on the outside of the building, and you could use ramps instead of staircases. It only talks about ingress and egress for fire safety, and it explains how you're supposed to encase wires, or if wires are not encased it describes the way the wiring must be sheathed to protect the occupants.You can heat your house entirely with an open fire, and the code speaks to how to do that safely. So it's unlike "design patterns" in a lot of ways in that the code tries to accommodate the kinds of buildings we try to build and the ways in which we modify buildings because that's easier than saying "these are all the allowed ways of building an entry staircase." Design Patterns are more in the latter category.
You can heat your house entirely with an open fire, and the code speaks to how to do that safely. So it's unlike "design patterns" in a lot of ways in that the code tries to accommodate the kinds of buildings we try to build and the ways in which we modify buildings because that's easier than saying "these are all the allowed ways of building an entry staircase." Design Patterns are more in the latter category.
reply
reply
reply
reply
OOP has no firm theoretical foundation, unlike FP which is rooted in the formalisms of mathematics.
reply
The first theoretical foundation of OOP is structural induction. If you design a class such that (1) the constructor enforces an invariant and (2) every public method maintains that invariant, then by induction it holds all the time. The access modifiers on methods help formalise and enforce that. You can do something similar in a functional language, or even in C if you're disciplined (especially with pointers), but it was an explicit design goal of the C++/Java/C# strand of OOP to anchor that in the language.The second theoretical foundation is subtyping or Liskov substitution, a bit of simple category theory - which gets you things like contravariance on return types and various calculi depending on how your generics work. Unfortunately the C++ people decided to implement the idea with subclassing which turned out to be a mess, whereas interface subtyping gets you what you probably wanted in the first place, and still gives you formalisms like Array[T] <= Iterable[S] for any S >= T (or even X[T] <= Y[S] for S >= T and X[_] <= Y[_] if you define subtyping on functors). In Java nowadays you have a Consumer
Reading time 1 minute
Production on Alien: Earth season 2 is beginning very soon. Go behind the scenes on Ready or Not 2. Plus, meet some new monsters in a new look at Monarch‘s return. Spoilers go!
Empire has a new image of Din piloting an Imperial Remnant AT-RT.
View this post on Instagram
According to The Wrap, the live-action Voltron movie is set to release sometime next year.
Meanwhile, a new report from insider MyTimetoShineHello (via Heroic Hollywood) alleges Doctor Doom will bring an end to the Multiverse in Avengers: Doomsday, destroying “every timeline except for one.”
The cast and crew of Ready Or Not 2 discuss the “insane” sequel in a new featurette.
Elsewhere, a man searching the woods for his missing father instead finds a cannibalistic horde of his imperfectly cloned sister in the teaser for Dead Eyes, a first-person horror film shot entirely from the viewpoint of its protagonist.
According to Sydney Chandler in a recent interview with Deadline, production on the second season of Alien: Earth begins this May.
Claire and Jamie discuss a prophecy of Frank's in a clip from tonight's season premiere of Outlander.
Finally, our heroes struggle with monsters of all sizes in a clip from today's new episode of Monarch: Legacy of Monsters.
Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what's next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.
Explore more on these topics
Share this story
Subscribe and interact with our community, get up to date with our customised Newsletters and much more.
Even when your power goes down, your Wi-Fi won't.
'The Last of Us' and 'Fantastic Four' star apparently does a lot more in the upcoming 'Star Wars' movie.
Lucasfilm president Dave Filoni calls the new movie 'a completely different era' of 'Star Wars,' but that requires some context.
Plus, the shelved 'M3GAN' spinoff may finally see the light of day.
Plus, 'Sonic 4' might have found some more wild casting.
Plus, work's already begun on 'Mortal Kombat 3'.
©2026 GIZMODO USA LLC.
All rights reserved.
Founder Summit 2026 in Boston: Don't miss ticket savings of up to $300. Register Now.
Save up to $680 on your Disrupt 2026 pass. Ends 11:59 p.m. PT tonight. REGISTER NOW.
Latest
AI
Amazon
Apps
Biotech & Health
Climate
Cloud Computing
Commerce
Crypto
Enterprise
EVs
Fintech
Fundraising
Gadgets
Gaming
Google
Government & Policy
Hardware
Instagram
Layoffs
Media & Entertainment
Meta
Microsoft
Privacy
Robotics
Security
Social
Space
Startups
TikTok
Transportation
Venture
Staff
Events
Startup Battlefield
StrictlyVC
Newsletters
Podcasts
Videos
Partner Content
TechCrunch Brand Studio
Crunchboard
Contact Us
City Detect, a company that uses vision AI to help local governments monitor the health of buildings and neighborhoods, announced on Friday a $13 million Series A round led by Prudence Venture Capital.
The startup launched in 2021, and Gavin Baum-Blake, the remaining co-founder, serves as CEO. He said the company was founded in part because cities were struggling to deal with “urban blight and decay.” The idea was to use advanced computer vision and AI technology to help cities track and fix such problems.
City Detect mounts cameras on public vehicles like garbage trucks and street sweepers, captures photos of surrounding buildings as those vehicles pass, then uses computer vision to analyze the images. It's essentially a Google Maps Street View, but focused on ensuring buildings are up to code.
“The problems could be graffiti, illegal dumping, litter that's on the side of the road,” Baum-Blake told TechCrunch. Then, City Detect works with local governments to fix the issues, a process that usually involves local officials sending a crew out to clean everything up.
Right now, tracking dilapidated buildings is very manual, so Baum-Blake considers his competition to be the “status quo.”
“They're able to do 50 per week,” he said of humans tasked with keeping track of decaying buildings, “whereas we're able to do thousands per week.”
The product, which Baum-Blake has patented, has some fun and essential features. The latter is that faces and license plates are always blurred for privacy reasons; the former is that City Detect's technology can distinguish between street art and vandalism. It also helps governments track whether landlords are not properly maintaining their buildings.
“We're able to see if there's structural roof issues or we're able to identify if there's been storm damage,” Baum-Blake continued.
City Detect is in at least 17 cities and works with local governments in places like Dallas and Miami. The company has raised $15 million in funding to date and is a member of the GovAI Coalition (an AI governance collective), is SOC 2 Type II compliant (meaning it's independently certified for privacy), and follows its own responsible AI policy.
“We published our Responsible AI policy in response to a consortium of local governments that stated they were looking for clarity on what vendors were actually willing to commit to,” Baum-Blake said. “We committed to this policy so that our local government partners could know what to expect from us.”
Baum-Blake said the new funding will be used to hire more engineers and advance some of the storm-detection damage technology. It also wants to expand throughout the U.S.
“We are seeing huge efficiency gains across the departments that we work with, we're seeing more instances of blight being solved without anyone receiving a citation, we're seeing tires and litter, and illegal dumping being abated quicker and detected quicker,” he said. “It's exciting to see technology-forward municipalities lean into predictive AI like City Detect's models.”
Zeal Capital Partners, Knoll Ventures, and Las Olas Venture Capital also participated in the round.
Topics
Senior Reporter, Venture
Dominic-Madori Davis is a senior venture capital and startup reporter at TechCrunch. She is based in New York City.
You can contact or verify outreach from Dominic by emailing dominic.davis@techcrunch.com or via encrypted message at +1 646 831-7565 on Signal.
Actively scaling? Fundraising? Planning your next launch?TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026 delivers tactical playbooks and direct access to 1,000+ founders and investors who are building, backing, and closing.Register by March 13 to save up to $300.
Cluely CEO Roy Lee admits to publicly lying about revenue numbers last year
Jensen Huang says Nvidia is pulling back from OpenAI and Anthropic, but his explanation raises more questions than it answers
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calls OpenAI's messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies,' report says
ChatGPT uninstalls surged by 295% after DoD deal
MyFitnessPal has acquired Cal AI, the viral calorie app built by teens
Anthropic's Claude reports widespread outage
The trap Anthropic built for itself
© 2026 TechCrunch Media LLC.
Founder Summit 2026 in Boston: Don't miss ticket savings of up to $300. Register Now.
Save up to $680 on your Disrupt 2026 pass. Ends 11:59 p.m. PT tonight. REGISTER NOW.
Latest
AI
Amazon
Apps
Biotech & Health
Climate
Cloud Computing
Commerce
Crypto
Enterprise
EVs
Fintech
Fundraising
Gadgets
Gaming
Google
Government & Policy
Hardware
Instagram
Layoffs
Media & Entertainment
Meta
Microsoft
Privacy
Robotics
Security
Social
Space
Startups
TikTok
Transportation
Venture
Staff
Events
Startup Battlefield
StrictlyVC
Newsletters
Podcasts
Videos
Partner Content
TechCrunch Brand Studio
Crunchboard
Contact Us
Amid enduring investor appetite for all things quantum, another European company in the space is graduating from the private markets. Just two weeks after Finnish quantum unicorn IQM said it was going public via a merger with a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC), its French rival Pasqal is doing the same.
Accompanied by a separate $200 million private funding round, Pasqal's SPAC deal will see it merging with Bleichroeder Acquisition Corp II and subsequently being listed on the Nasdaq. The merger values Pasqal at $2 billion, pre-money.
Bleichroeder is backed by Michel Combes, a French telecom veteran who previously headed Vodafone and Alcatel-Lucent, and Andrew Gundlach, an investment advisor.
Pasqal is a full-stack quantum computing company taking on Big Tech. It generates annual revenue in the tens of millions from selling hardware, software, and cloud services to labs and industry partners.
The SPAC deal comes as Pasqal's North American counterparts, which took a similar route to the public markets, have seen their stocks surge in recent months. U.S. markets offer companies like Pasqal the sort of scale and revenue multiples that are harder to come by at home in Europe, not to mention the cash they need for the long journey to fully realize the potential of quantum computing.
But Pasqal (like IQM) is planning a dual U.S.-European listing. The Nasdaq float is scheduled for this year, and the company will prepare to list on Euronext later in 2026 or 2027.
The dual-listing could be one way Pasqal is trying to reassure its French backers. Bpifrance, France's public investment bank, is a key shareholder, and will remain active both in Pasqal's cap table and the company's board, according to a press release.
Pasqal stressed that it expects to remain a French legal entity headquartered in Palaiseau, a suburb of Paris that houses a cluster of academic institutions, as well as industrial research centers run by Pasqal's clients, energy giant EDF and defense company Thales. The quantum computing company also intends to appoint “a new non-executive chair of French nationality” to its board.
An investor presentation from Bleichroeder indicates that Combes will serve as “lead independent director of Pasqal” after the deal closes — though this appointment may not be received completely positively in France.
In 2015, current French President Emmanuel Macron publicly rebuked Combes for stepping down as Alcatel-Lucent's CEO before a takeover of the ailing Alcatel by Nokia had closed. Combes' exit package proved so controversial that it was eventually reduced by half.
Combes' subsequent moves have gone some way toward rehabilitating his reputation in French tech circles. After replacing Marcelo Claure as Sprint's CEO, he headed SoftBank Group International, where he championed French scale-ups like Swile. But he left that position after only five months amid a wave of departures in 2022.
Pasqal is no stranger to executive reshuffles. Buried in the announcement is the fact that the company's former executive chairman, Wasiq Bokhari, is now its CEO. And Loïc Henriet, who started off as its CTO, then moved up to a co-CEO role and later on was its sole CEO, is back as CTO again.
Reaffirming its commitment to France may bring more intangible benefits for Pasqal, too. The company is telling taxpayers that its growth will create highly qualified jobs in the country, where it plans to hire 50 people over the next 18 months. Also, not being an American company in the current geopolitical climate has a good chance of opening doors, as French AI lab Mistral AI has found.
But no company can last long without a good product. The race is intense in quantum computing since competing approaches to the tech hold equal promise. IQM, for instance, bets on superconducting qubits, while Pasqal follows the neutral atom path championed by its co-founder, physics Nobel laureate Alain Aspect.
This technical foundation will play a key role for Pasqal, which plans to keep investing heavily in R&D to develop a fault-tolerant quantum computer by the end of the decade. Such advancements will be essential to unlocking applications in areas like drug discovery, healthcare, and cybersecurity.
The SPAC transaction is expected to close in the second half of 2026, and Pasqal expects a pro-forma market capitalization of approximately $2.6 billion, giving the company cash to put toward its goal of doubling production capacity within 24 months.
The $200 million private funding round saw investments from Parkway, Quanta Computer, LG Electronics, and CMA CGM. The company's backers include the European Innovation Council Fund, Series B lead investor Temasek, Saudi Aramco Entrepreneurship Ventures, and ISAI.
Topics
Freelance Reporter
Anna Heim is a writer and editorial consultant.
You can contact or verify outreach from Anna by emailing annatechcrunch [at] gmail.com.
As a freelance reporter at TechCrunch since 2021, she has covered a large range of startup-related topics including AI, fintech & insurtech, SaaS & pricing, and global venture capital trends.
As of May 2025, her reporting for TechCrunch focuses on Europe's most interesting startup stories.
Anna has moderated panels and conducted onstage interviews at industry events of all sizes, including major tech conferences such as TechCrunch Disrupt, 4YFN, South Summit, TNW Conference, VivaTech, and many more.
A former LATAM & Media Editor at The Next Web, startup founder and Sciences Po Paris alum, she's fluent in multiple languages, including French, English, Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese.
Actively scaling? Fundraising? Planning your next launch?TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026 delivers tactical playbooks and direct access to 1,000+ founders and investors who are building, backing, and closing.Register by March 13 to save up to $300.
Cluely CEO Roy Lee admits to publicly lying about revenue numbers last year
Jensen Huang says Nvidia is pulling back from OpenAI and Anthropic, but his explanation raises more questions than it answers
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calls OpenAI's messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies,' report says
ChatGPT uninstalls surged by 295% after DoD deal
MyFitnessPal has acquired Cal AI, the viral calorie app built by teens
Anthropic's Claude reports widespread outage
The trap Anthropic built for itself
© 2026 TechCrunch Media LLC.
Sure, the junior manager might use them vaguely to mimic, but IMHO, when vague language comes up at decision tables, it's usually coding something more precise in a sort of plausible deniability.A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.A senior director talks about better alignment of their various depts: We need to cut fat and merge, start identifying your bad playersetc etc.If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.A senior director talks about better alignment of their various depts: We need to cut fat and merge, start identifying your bad playersetc etc.If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
A senior director talks about better alignment of their various depts: We need to cut fat and merge, start identifying your bad playersetc etc.If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
etc etc.If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
If my impressions are correct, of course ICs are going to balk at these statements - they seem disconnected from reality and are magically disconnected from the effects on purpose. Yes, this is bad management to the ICs, but it's pretty culturally inevitable, I think, to have an in-group signalling their strategies using coded language.A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
A good manager takes this direction in front of all their ICs, laughs it off as corpo speak, but was given the signal to have a private talk with one of their group who triggered the problem... I dunno maybe my time in management was particularly distopian, but this seemed obvious once I saw it.
reply
reply
reply
When you put enough bafflegab around it, you can almost ignore that you said something unpleasant. Because the part of our brains that processes for emotional content, doesn't process complex language very well. Hence the example with ten paragraphs of complexity to hide the pain of a major lay-off.After I noticed this, I found that I did this. I reliably use complex language when I don't like what I'm saying. So much so that I could use readability checkers to find discomfort that I was not aware that I had!And I'm not the only one to notice this. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpVtJNv4ZNM for George Carlin's famous skit on how the honesty of the phrase "shell shock" over time got softened over time to "post-traumatic stress disorder". A phrase that can be understood, but no longer felt.Corporations have just developed their own special complex language for this. And you're right. It is emotionally dishonest. That's why they do it.
After I noticed this, I found that I did this. I reliably use complex language when I don't like what I'm saying. So much so that I could use readability checkers to find discomfort that I was not aware that I had!And I'm not the only one to notice this. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpVtJNv4ZNM for George Carlin's famous skit on how the honesty of the phrase "shell shock" over time got softened over time to "post-traumatic stress disorder". A phrase that can be understood, but no longer felt.Corporations have just developed their own special complex language for this. And you're right. It is emotionally dishonest. That's why they do it.
And I'm not the only one to notice this. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpVtJNv4ZNM for George Carlin's famous skit on how the honesty of the phrase "shell shock" over time got softened over time to "post-traumatic stress disorder". A phrase that can be understood, but no longer felt.Corporations have just developed their own special complex language for this. And you're right. It is emotionally dishonest. That's why they do it.
Corporations have just developed their own special complex language for this. And you're right. It is emotionally dishonest. That's why they do it.
reply
Pretty shocking belief when you're of courseing all "ICs".If it was inevitable than the amount and degree of corporate BS would've been stable over the last 5 decades, and across countries and languages.In reality, it has been anything but, instead showing massive differences across both.
If it was inevitable than the amount and degree of corporate BS would've been stable over the last 5 decades, and across countries and languages.In reality, it has been anything but, instead showing massive differences across both.
In reality, it has been anything but, instead showing massive differences across both.
reply
Yep. I'm a director now. This is exactly how it is. A big part of being effective in this role is understanding how direct you can be in a given scenario.A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.Option 1 is how I'd say it to a peer whose org is duplicating effort. You can give your advice, but at the end of the day: not my circus, not my clowns.Option 2 is a more-direct way of how I'd say it to someone in my own org. I'd rephrase to: "Someone else is already doing this; focus your efforts on something more impactful."
A senior manager on reviewing a proposal asks them to synergize with existing efforts: Your work is redundant you're wasting your time.Option 1 is how I'd say it to a peer whose org is duplicating effort. You can give your advice, but at the end of the day: not my circus, not my clowns.Option 2 is a more-direct way of how I'd say it to someone in my own org. I'd rephrase to: "Someone else is already doing this; focus your efforts on something more impactful."
Option 1 is how I'd say it to a peer whose org is duplicating effort. You can give your advice, but at the end of the day: not my circus, not my clowns.Option 2 is a more-direct way of how I'd say it to someone in my own org. I'd rephrase to: "Someone else is already doing this; focus your efforts on something more impactful."
Option 2 is a more-direct way of how I'd say it to someone in my own org. I'd rephrase to: "Someone else is already doing this; focus your efforts on something more impactful."
reply
"We will actualize a renewed level of cradle-to-grave credentialing" is an example from the article - you can't actualize a level, you can't renew a level either. And "cradle-to-grave credentialing" is at best a bad way to describe some real concept. It's word-salad from start to finish. It's not coded language, it's bullshit.
reply
reply
1. Everything is scrutinized in corporate world.2. It'd be tiring to constantly switch between coded vs unfiltered truth.The truth is some of the realities of higher management are some pretty crude primitives GP touches upon: killing redundant projects, moving headcount etc.It's not taken well to discuss those unfiltered so there's the corp speak layer on top.The only time the filter can drop is in unrecorded 1:1 or tiny meetings. Everything else has meeting minutes, some attendees who wouldn't be comfortable with the raw unfiltered descriptions, as those harsh/crude mechanisms may appear cruel.Also some of the directions are sometimes pure "feudal" power plays, so of course nobody will say unfiltered: we are making move X because I picked the winner.Corporate life is tiring enough, if you had to permanently scan the room to figure out if you can switch to unfiltered talk, it'd be too much. Much more efficient to always have the filter on.
2. It'd be tiring to constantly switch between coded vs unfiltered truth.The truth is some of the realities of higher management are some pretty crude primitives GP touches upon: killing redundant projects, moving headcount etc.It's not taken well to discuss those unfiltered so there's the corp speak layer on top.The only time the filter can drop is in unrecorded 1:1 or tiny meetings. Everything else has meeting minutes, some attendees who wouldn't be comfortable with the raw unfiltered descriptions, as those harsh/crude mechanisms may appear cruel.Also some of the directions are sometimes pure "feudal" power plays, so of course nobody will say unfiltered: we are making move X because I picked the winner.Corporate life is tiring enough, if you had to permanently scan the room to figure out if you can switch to unfiltered talk, it'd be too much. Much more efficient to always have the filter on.
The truth is some of the realities of higher management are some pretty crude primitives GP touches upon: killing redundant projects, moving headcount etc.It's not taken well to discuss those unfiltered so there's the corp speak layer on top.The only time the filter can drop is in unrecorded 1:1 or tiny meetings. Everything else has meeting minutes, some attendees who wouldn't be comfortable with the raw unfiltered descriptions, as those harsh/crude mechanisms may appear cruel.Also some of the directions are sometimes pure "feudal" power plays, so of course nobody will say unfiltered: we are making move X because I picked the winner.Corporate life is tiring enough, if you had to permanently scan the room to figure out if you can switch to unfiltered talk, it'd be too much. Much more efficient to always have the filter on.
It's not taken well to discuss those unfiltered so there's the corp speak layer on top.The only time the filter can drop is in unrecorded 1:1 or tiny meetings. Everything else has meeting minutes, some attendees who wouldn't be comfortable with the raw unfiltered descriptions, as those harsh/crude mechanisms may appear cruel.Also some of the directions are sometimes pure "feudal" power plays, so of course nobody will say unfiltered: we are making move X because I picked the winner.Corporate life is tiring enough, if you had to permanently scan the room to figure out if you can switch to unfiltered talk, it'd be too much. Much more efficient to always have the filter on.
The only time the filter can drop is in unrecorded 1:1 or tiny meetings. Everything else has meeting minutes, some attendees who wouldn't be comfortable with the raw unfiltered descriptions, as those harsh/crude mechanisms may appear cruel.Also some of the directions are sometimes pure "feudal" power plays, so of course nobody will say unfiltered: we are making move X because I picked the winner.Corporate life is tiring enough, if you had to permanently scan the room to figure out if you can switch to unfiltered talk, it'd be too much. Much more efficient to always have the filter on.
Also some of the directions are sometimes pure "feudal" power plays, so of course nobody will say unfiltered: we are making move X because I picked the winner.Corporate life is tiring enough, if you had to permanently scan the room to figure out if you can switch to unfiltered talk, it'd be too much. Much more efficient to always have the filter on.
Corporate life is tiring enough, if you had to permanently scan the room to figure out if you can switch to unfiltered talk, it'd be too much. Much more efficient to always have the filter on.
reply
You _want_ most ICs to ignore a negative message that doesn't involve them, and you _want_ to give middle / lower managers the discretion to address an ICs "nonsynergistic" contributions on their own time. It's a signal not a prescription. This allows a public person to make a public statement and set direction without prescribing actions so lower management and ICs can do their thing.Upper management becomes increasingly vibes-based, from what I can tell.
Upper management becomes increasingly vibes-based, from what I can tell.
reply
This sort of management is dysfunctional even in it's premises.
reply
As with all forms of cynicism, it has a grain of truth. And a much larger grain of truth than is comfortable.
reply
https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/book-review-the-gervais-pri...
reply
reply
And there's blatant bullshit, like paradigm shift, culture building, and so on.Two categories of execspeak.
Two categories of execspeak.
reply
reply
What's specifically interesting about corpo-speak though is it's one of the only version of this (at least that I know of) where it's main purpose is to be euphemistic. In most other fields, the coded language is meant to be more descriptive to the in-group. In management, the coded language is designed to be less descriptive on purpose to avoid the human cost of the decision.It's dystopian because it follows the same patterns as military language, and serves the same purpose to sanitize unpleasant realities. "Neutralize the target" in military lingo, "Right-size" in corpo-speak. In both cases, the human at the end is stripped of their humanity into a target or resource to be managed (or killed).
It's dystopian because it follows the same patterns as military language, and serves the same purpose to sanitize unpleasant realities. "Neutralize the target" in military lingo, "Right-size" in corpo-speak. In both cases, the human at the end is stripped of their humanity into a target or resource to be managed (or killed).
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
https://brightpath-global-solutions.com/Edit: repo link: https://github.com/chronick/global-business-solutions
Edit: repo link: https://github.com/chronick/global-business-solutions
reply
https://lurkertech.com/buzzword-bingo/
I'm glad to see, 25-30 years later, the hackers/cynical-tech-workers getting justified by actual social science research.
reply
https://www.corporate-ipsum.com/
reply
reply
reply
That's always the line you're listening for. Everything before that is bullshit, everything after is trying to justify the new product for that one change.In favor of preferable outcomes of operational excellence as part of our customer success. Barf.
In favor of preferable outcomes of operational excellence as part of our customer success. Barf.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
We are undoing much of this progress by now insisting everything be expressed in natural language for a machine to translate on our behalf, like a tour guide.The natives will continue to speak amongst themselves in their mother tongue.
The natives will continue to speak amongst themselves in their mother tongue.
reply
It is awfully unproductive way to do it but I'm sure HR approves.
reply
reply
Corporate speak as a signalling mechanism is only effective among the "clueless" in the Gervais model. If any CEO tried to talk 1:1 to a competent board member that way, they would lose all credibility. Once you've operated at a certain level you get it>a system for turning bullshit into parse errors.This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corporate speak. It's deliberately vague as a way to navigate uncertainty while still projecting authority and avoiding accountability in settings like a town hall, large meeting etc. Which is not to be read as a necessarily "bad" thing. No one wants a micromanaging CEO. They have to set vision and direction while leaving space for it top be executed by all the layers under them
>a system for turning bullshit into parse errors.This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corporate speak. It's deliberately vague as a way to navigate uncertainty while still projecting authority and avoiding accountability in settings like a town hall, large meeting etc. Which is not to be read as a necessarily "bad" thing. No one wants a micromanaging CEO. They have to set vision and direction while leaving space for it top be executed by all the layers under them
This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corporate speak. It's deliberately vague as a way to navigate uncertainty while still projecting authority and avoiding accountability in settings like a town hall, large meeting etc. Which is not to be read as a necessarily "bad" thing. No one wants a micromanaging CEO. They have to set vision and direction while leaving space for it top be executed by all the layers under them
reply
A prime example of corporate speak that is, as you rightly said, 'only effective among the "clueless"'
reply
This also holds true for competent non-board members. I have interacted with C-level executives at fortune 100 companies, as well as smaller businesses. It is almost impressive how quickly they can switch in and out of corporate bullshit mode. I think it's what the kids call code-switching.In general, once they trust you a bit, and they know someone isn't listening they talk like a normal person. Then you ask a difficult question about the business and the corporate-speak kicks in like a security sub routine trying to prevent them from saying the wrong thing.I have also met some that seemingly calculate their tone and cadence to try to manipulate the person(s)/people(s) they're talking to. It's fascinating when you catch them doing it, and it's different than simply matching like a chameleon. For example, they may use an authoritative tone with younger people, a kind but subtly threatening tone with anxious people, and a buddybuddy tone with a plumber or someone they know isn't going to put up with any bullshit.I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.
In general, once they trust you a bit, and they know someone isn't listening they talk like a normal person. Then you ask a difficult question about the business and the corporate-speak kicks in like a security sub routine trying to prevent them from saying the wrong thing.I have also met some that seemingly calculate their tone and cadence to try to manipulate the person(s)/people(s) they're talking to. It's fascinating when you catch them doing it, and it's different than simply matching like a chameleon. For example, they may use an authoritative tone with younger people, a kind but subtly threatening tone with anxious people, and a buddybuddy tone with a plumber or someone they know isn't going to put up with any bullshit.I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.
I have also met some that seemingly calculate their tone and cadence to try to manipulate the person(s)/people(s) they're talking to. It's fascinating when you catch them doing it, and it's different than simply matching like a chameleon. For example, they may use an authoritative tone with younger people, a kind but subtly threatening tone with anxious people, and a buddybuddy tone with a plumber or someone they know isn't going to put up with any bullshit.I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.
I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.
reply
It's some combination of what they call "self monitoring" in social psychology, plus general EQ and Machiavellian personality traits that allow people to read the room and adjust their tone, speaking style, word choice (including picking up in-group lingo quickly), posture etc to be most effective given the setting. This applies to basically any social environment, and is often a frustrating reality to many people who may be extremely competent but see others around them who are obviously less competent "getting ahead" through social acumen, office politics etc.This has been studied among MBA graduates, Do Chameleons Get Ahead, The Effects of Self-Monitoring on Managerial Careers (pdf): https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/...
This has been studied among MBA graduates, Do Chameleons Get Ahead, The Effects of Self-Monitoring on Managerial Careers (pdf): https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/...
reply
It definitely takes a certain kind of person to be a good fit in that role
reply
This is a trait of a psychopath. Not surprisingly, one finds a lot of them in the executive ranks.
reply
reply
Social organizations require some sort of glue to bind them together. They need ways to maintain cohesion despite vagueness and to obscure (small) errors. There is a cap put upon max individual output, but aggregate output is much higher than whatever a collection of individuals could attain. This is a very basic dynamic that is lost amidst a cult of individualism that refuses to admit to any good greater than themselves.Yes - the CEO talking to the board in this way would lose credibility. But a CEO failing to deploy this jargon correctly would also lose credibility with the board : it's obvious he doesn't know how to lead.What I would like to see is a study of the ratio's between corporate speak and technical speak - and the inflection points at which too much of either causes organization ruin.
Yes - the CEO talking to the board in this way would lose credibility. But a CEO failing to deploy this jargon correctly would also lose credibility with the board : it's obvious he doesn't know how to lead.What I would like to see is a study of the ratio's between corporate speak and technical speak - and the inflection points at which too much of either causes organization ruin.
What I would like to see is a study of the ratio's between corporate speak and technical speak - and the inflection points at which too much of either causes organization ruin.
reply
Edit: seems that searching for „Gervais principle“ turned up what was talked about…
reply
reply
I (and many others) read it as "dishonesty"
reply
reply
I suspect that most people just aren't wired up that way - we have a natural tendency to want to follow leaders and what we seem to want most from leaders is certainty and confidence. Does it matter what leaders are certain and confident about - not really.
reply
reply
Let's say there are a thousand people there at the town hall. You don't want any of them to leave upset, or even concerned. But they each have different things that will make them concerned and upset. So there are maybe 10,000 tripwires out there, and you don't want to trip any of them.So you're not being dishonest, exactly. You're being nonspecific. You don't want to get down in the weeds and nail down the answer too tightly, because you may trip someone's tripwire. (And also because it would take to long.) So you say something true but not very specific.(I mean, there can be dishonesty, too, but that's a different thing. Smooth vagueness can still be honest, just unsatisfyingly vague.)
So you're not being dishonest, exactly. You're being nonspecific. You don't want to get down in the weeds and nail down the answer too tightly, because you may trip someone's tripwire. (And also because it would take to long.) So you say something true but not very specific.(I mean, there can be dishonesty, too, but that's a different thing. Smooth vagueness can still be honest, just unsatisfyingly vague.)
(I mean, there can be dishonesty, too, but that's a different thing. Smooth vagueness can still be honest, just unsatisfyingly vague.)
reply
reply
You don't need formal language (though formal languages can serve that purpose). You just need to listen like a normal human being rather than like a corporate suit, and that kind of language is just incomprehensible - a parse error. You have to work at it to make sense of that kind of language. And why I took from your first paragraph is permission to treat it as a parse error instead of as some valid message that I needed to decode.
reply
Theres no high minded difference. Its just in/out group identification.
reply
that's a very neat way to put it!
reply
reply
I look at OOP Patterns as standards and practices.The same way we have building codes for staircases the framing of walls and electrical installations to prevent injury or collapse or fire.Sure, you can dodge a lot of design pattern paradigms and still make a working application that makes money. You can also invent your own system when building your house and maybe nothing bad will happen. That tragedy hasn't yet struck does not make the building codes bad just because you got away with it.
The same way we have building codes for staircases the framing of walls and electrical installations to prevent injury or collapse or fire.Sure, you can dodge a lot of design pattern paradigms and still make a working application that makes money. You can also invent your own system when building your house and maybe nothing bad will happen. That tragedy hasn't yet struck does not make the building codes bad just because you got away with it.
Sure, you can dodge a lot of design pattern paradigms and still make a working application that makes money. You can also invent your own system when building your house and maybe nothing bad will happen. That tragedy hasn't yet struck does not make the building codes bad just because you got away with it.
reply
reply
The *concept* of patterns makes sense. A shared language that developers can use when building things.The *reality* of patterns has been much less useful. The original ones were indeed a reaction to warts in the popular languages of their era. And as we tend to do in our industry, these have been cargo culted along the way and for some reason I still see people talking about them as first class citizens 30 years later.People don't seem to realize that patterns should be and are fluid, and as our industry evolves these patterns are evolving as well. A major difference between software engineering and the analogous fields people use when talking about patterns is those industries are much older and move less quickly
The *reality* of patterns has been much less useful. The original ones were indeed a reaction to warts in the popular languages of their era. And as we tend to do in our industry, these have been cargo culted along the way and for some reason I still see people talking about them as first class citizens 30 years later.People don't seem to realize that patterns should be and are fluid, and as our industry evolves these patterns are evolving as well. A major difference between software engineering and the analogous fields people use when talking about patterns is those industries are much older and move less quickly
People don't seem to realize that patterns should be and are fluid, and as our industry evolves these patterns are evolving as well. A major difference between software engineering and the analogous fields people use when talking about patterns is those industries are much older and move less quickly
reply
reply
reply
reply
I believe C has allowed passing and returning functions from... the jump, no?
reply
reply
def addX(x: Int): Function[Int,Int] = {
y => x+y
}
addX(5) then returns a function that adds 5. So closures, which are equivalent to objects (behind the scenes, the compiler needs to allocate a structure to remember that 5 and know the "member function" to call to do the plus), and usually more straightforward.Once you get used to doing this, you realize it's useful everywhere.In a decent language with functional programming and generics support a lot of GoF patterns can be directly encoded as a simple type signature where you receive, return, or both some function, so there's not really much else to say about them. Like half of the behavioral patterns become variations of the interpreter pattern.
Once you get used to doing this, you realize it's useful everywhere.In a decent language with functional programming and generics support a lot of GoF patterns can be directly encoded as a simple type signature where you receive, return, or both some function, so there's not really much else to say about them. Like half of the behavioral patterns become variations of the interpreter pattern.
In a decent language with functional programming and generics support a lot of GoF patterns can be directly encoded as a simple type signature where you receive, return, or both some function, so there's not really much else to say about them. Like half of the behavioral patterns become variations of the interpreter pattern.
reply
reply
reply
reply
You can have your building engineered, in which case building walls out of 2x6's 16 inches on center is not off the table, but neither is a mortise and tenon timber frame with partition walls. In that paradigm, the code tries not to be descriptive of an exact technique but only gives you criteria to satisfy. For example you could run all of your electrical wiring on the outside of the walls or on the outside of the building, and you could use ramps instead of staircases. It only talks about ingress and egress for fire safety, and it explains how you're supposed to encase wires, or if wires are not encased it describes the way the wiring must be sheathed to protect the occupants.You can heat your house entirely with an open fire, and the code speaks to how to do that safely. So it's unlike "design patterns" in a lot of ways in that the code tries to accommodate the kinds of buildings we try to build and the ways in which we modify buildings because that's easier than saying "these are all the allowed ways of building an entry staircase." Design Patterns are more in the latter category.
You can heat your house entirely with an open fire, and the code speaks to how to do that safely. So it's unlike "design patterns" in a lot of ways in that the code tries to accommodate the kinds of buildings we try to build and the ways in which we modify buildings because that's easier than saying "these are all the allowed ways of building an entry staircase." Design Patterns are more in the latter category.
reply
reply
reply
reply
OOP has no firm theoretical foundation, unlike FP which is rooted in the formalisms of mathematics.
reply
The first theoretical foundation of OOP is structural induction. If you design a class such that (1) the constructor enforces an invariant and (2) every public method maintains that invariant, then by induction it holds all the time. The access modifiers on methods help formalise and enforce that. You can do something similar in a functional language, or even in C if you're disciplined (especially with pointers), but it was an explicit design goal of the C++/Java/C# strand of OOP to anchor that in the language.The second theoretical foundation is subtyping or Liskov substitution, a bit of simple category theory - which gets you things like contravariance on return types and various calculi depending on how your generics work. Unfortunately the C++ people decided to implement the idea with subclassing which turned out to be a mess, whereas interface subtyping gets you what you probably wanted in the first place, and still gives you formalisms like Array[T] <= Iterable[S] for any S >= T (or even X[T] <= Y[S] for S >= T and X[_] <= Y[_] if you define subtyping on functors). In Java nowadays you have a Consumer
Founder Summit 2026 in Boston: Don't miss ticket savings of up to $300. Register Now.
Save up to $680 on your Disrupt 2026 pass. Ends 11:59 p.m. PT tonight. REGISTER NOW.
Latest
AI
Amazon
Apps
Biotech & Health
Climate
Cloud Computing
Commerce
Crypto
Enterprise
EVs
Fintech
Fundraising
Gadgets
Gaming
Google
Government & Policy
Hardware
Instagram
Layoffs
Media & Entertainment
Meta
Microsoft
Privacy
Robotics
Security
Social
Space
Startups
TikTok
Transportation
Venture
Staff
Events
Startup Battlefield
StrictlyVC
Newsletters
Podcasts
Videos
Partner Content
TechCrunch Brand Studio
Crunchboard
Contact Us
Meta is now allowing rival AI companies to provide their chatbots on WhatsApp to Brazilian users for a fee, a day after the company confirmed a similar decision for users in Europe.
Earlier this week, Brazil's antitrust regulator CADE ruled against Meta and rejected its appeal to block an earlier order to suspend its policy change that seeks to bar third-party AI chatbots on WhatsApp.
“Upon reviewing the case, the CADE Tribunal determined that the necessary requirements for maintaining the preventive measure were present. According to the case rapporteur, Councilor Carlos Jacques, there is evidence of legal plausibility, considering the relevance of WhatsApp in the Brazilian instant messaging services market,” CADE's ruling reads.
The regulator added that banning third-party AI chatbots on WhatsApp “would not be proportionate” and could result in competitive harm.
Meta said in response that it would let third-party AI chatbot providers use its WhatsApp Business API to offer their services on the app for a fee, wherever it is legally required to do so. The company will charge $0.0625 per “non-template message” in Brazil from March 11.
“Where we are legally required to provide AI chatbots through the WhatsApp business API, we are introducing pricing for the companies that choose to use our platform to provide those services,” a Meta spokesperson said.
Meta announced the policy change last October, which spurred several antitrust investigations, particularly because the company offers its own AI chatbot, Meta AI, inside WhatsApp. The company has maintained that its WhatsApp Business API was not designed to cater to AI chatbots and that they put a strain on the company's system.
While Meta is now allowing third-party chatbots in some regions because of regulations, developers tell TechCrunch that they are hesitant to resume services, saying the pricing set by Meta is high and could result in high costs.
Zapia, one of the companies that filed the complaint with CADE in Brazil, welcomed the decision.
“Competition and preventing powerful companies from limiting how innovation reaches users. At Zapia, we believe people should be free to choose the AI tools they use, and innovation only thrives when the platforms people rely on every day remain open. We will continue challenging these restrictions across the rest of Latin America, and we now look forward to seeing how Meta adapts its policies in Brazil to comply with the decision,” it said in a statement.
Topics
Ivan covers global consumer tech developments at TechCrunch. He is based out of India and has previously worked at publications including Huffington Post and The Next Web.
You can contact or verify outreach from Ivan by emailing im@ivanmehta.com or via encrypted message at ivan.42 on Signal.
Actively scaling? Fundraising? Planning your next launch?TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026 delivers tactical playbooks and direct access to 1,000+ founders and investors who are building, backing, and closing.Register by March 13 to save up to $300.
Cluely CEO Roy Lee admits to publicly lying about revenue numbers last year
Jensen Huang says Nvidia is pulling back from OpenAI and Anthropic, but his explanation raises more questions than it answers
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calls OpenAI's messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies,' report says
ChatGPT uninstalls surged by 295% after DoD deal
MyFitnessPal has acquired Cal AI, the viral calorie app built by teens
Anthropic's Claude reports widespread outage
The trap Anthropic built for itself
© 2026 TechCrunch Media LLC.
U.S. DoC is committed to promote secure exports of American AI hardware.
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
The U.S. Department of Commerce has issued a statement confirming that the U.S. government is looking to change AI hardware export rules, but provided little by way of detail. The officials confirmed that the U.S. DoC is looking to formalize an approach under which buyers of large quantities of AI accelerators must invest in U.S. AI infrastructure to obtain their hardware.
"The Commerce Department is committed to promoting secure exports of the American tech stack," a statement by the U.S. DoC reads. "We successfully advanced exports through our historic Middle East agreements, and there are ongoing internal government discussions about formalizing that approach."
The newly proposed export rules introduce a multi-level licensing structure tied to computing capacity. Smaller shipments of up to 1,000 Nvidia GB300 GPUs would undergo an expedited approval process; medium-scale deployments would need to secure pre-authorization from the U.S. Department of Commerce before applying for export license as well as operational transparency, disclosure of business activities, and potential on-site inspections by U.S. authorities; while planned large AI clusters set to use 200,000 of GB300 GPUs or more and operated by one entity in one country would require commitments to invest in U.S. AI infrastructure as part of the arrangement as well as intergovernmental talks with the U.S. to make national security assurances.
The terms attached to recent export licenses allowing Cerebras and Nvidia to supply hardware to the United Arab Emirates included a requirement that the Middle Eastern country invest one dollar in U.S. AI infrastructure for every dollar spent on its own domestic AI buildouts. If the same terms were to be attached to export licenses to other countries, then this would make hardware from AMD, Cerebras, Nvidia, and other suppliers of AI accelerators 2X more expensive for companies in these countries.
The U.S. DoC shot down claims of a return to anything resembling the AI Diffusion Rule from the Joe Biden era: "Today there was reporting that we were returning to the AI diffusion rule," the statement reads. "We will not. It was burdensome, overreaching, and disastrous."
While the AI Diffusion Rule was indeed very complicated, some approaches of the new rumored regulations would make them even more burdensome than the criticized export regime from early 2025.
The AI Diffusion Rule divided countries into three tiers based on trust and risk levels. Tier 1 included the U.S. and 18 close allies like Australia, Canada, Japan, Taiwan, the U.K., and much of Western Europe, which faced minimal restrictions on AI exports. In Tier 2 countries, entities could import up to 1,700 Nvidia H100 GPUs (or equivalent) without a license, and these did not count toward national AI chip limits. Tier 3 was banned altogether.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Meanwhile, getting up to 320,000 Nvidia H100 GPUs required entities in Tier 2 countries to qualify as National Validated End Users (NVEUs) and meet strict security requirements. Unverified organizations in Tier 2 were allowed to buy up to 50,000 GPUs per country, though the limit was expandable to 100,000 if their government reached a formal agreement with the U.S. Under no circumstances did the AI Diffusion Rule mandate investments in U.S. AI infrastructure by purchasers of American AI hardware.
If the new regulation is enacted, anything above 1,000 GB300 would be subject to pre-authorization before export licenses could be issued, which includes shipments to 18 allied nations. Getting 200,000 or more GB300 GPUs would essentially mandate investments in the U.S. AI buildouts. Then again, the reported rules are not final, and many of the requirements may be removed in the final versions of the proposed export regime.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom's Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.
Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.
©
Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street,
New York,
NY 10036.
A fantastic display.
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Buying a premium gaming monitor is one of the most potent upgrades you can make to your gaming setup, and this gaming deal from Asus is one of the best we've seen in recent weeks. Right now, you can score the Asus ROG Strix 32-inch 4K OLED Gaming Monitor (XG32UCWG) for just $799 at Amazon, its lowest-ever price at the retailer.
For that price, you get a glossy 4K OLED monitor, specifically a WOLED panel that uses a single white light layer. 3840 x 2160 resolution is paired with a 165Hz refresh rate for high-speed gaming and responsive visuals. Crucially, this monitor is dual-mode, so you can also game at FHD (1080p) with a refresh rate of up to 330Hz.
All-time low price
Save 20% of $200 on this 4K OLED gaming monitor with 165Hz refresh rate, plus dual mode support for 330Hz at FHD resolution.
We reviewed the Asus ROG Strix XG32UCWMG 4K OLED gaming monitor last year, and it scored very highly with a 4.5-star review and a Tom's Hardware Editor's Choice award. The model on sale here is the cheaper XG32UCWG variant (dropping the M). The model we reviewed featured a very potent 240Hz max refresh rate at 4K, along with 480Hz FHD, the same dual-mode configuration just with higher refresh rates. As such, the model on sale here is a good bit cheaper, owing to the lower refresh rate in both modes. Still, at 165Hz and 330Hz respectively, you're not exactly being short-changed when it comes to frames, and that's the only material difference between the two.
Still, you're getting the same WOLED panel in this cheaper model, the same peak HDR brightness of 1,300 nits, and the same build quality and design.
Performance aside, this 4K monitor features a DisplayPort 1.4 port, two HDMI 2.1 slots, one USB-C slot, a headphone jack, and a USB hub with three USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A slots. It doesn't have any built-in speakers, although if you're spending this much on a monitor, you're probably also rocking a decent pair of speakers or a gaming headset.
In our review of its big brother, we love this monitor line's glossy screen, with enhanced clarity and color saturation, accurate colors out of the box, large gamut coverage, and excellent build quality. All you're missing out on with this model are those extra frames. Considering the beefier XG32UCWMG is $1,100, however, the trade-off is excellent value.
If you're looking for more savings, check out our Best PC Hardware deals for a range of products, or dive deeper into our specialized SSD and Storage Deals, Hard Drive Deals, Gaming Monitor Deals, Graphics Card Deals, Gaming Chair, Best Wi-Fi Routers, Best Motherboard, or CPU Deals pages.
Stephen is Tom's Hardware's News Editor with almost a decade of industry experience covering technology, having worked at TechRadar, iMore, and even Apple over the years. He has covered the world of consumer tech from nearly every angle, including supply chain rumors, patents, and litigation, and more. When he's not at work, he loves reading about history and playing video games.
Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.
©
Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street,
New York,
NY 10036.
For decades, satellites, drones, and human spotters have all been part of war's surveillance and reconnaissance tool kit. In an age of cheap, insecure, internet-connected consumer devices, however, militaries have gained another powerful set of eyes on the ground: every hackable security camera installed outside a home or on a city street, pointed at potential bombing targets.
On Wednesday, Tel Aviv–based security firm Check Point released new research describing hundreds of hacking attempts that targeted consumer-grade security cameras around the Middle East—with many apparently timed to Iran's recent missile and drone strikes on targets that included Israel, Qatar, and Cyprus. Those camera-hijacking efforts, some of which Check Point has attributed to a hacker group that's been previously linked to Iranian intelligence, suggest that Iran's military has tried to use civilian surveillance cameras as a means to spot targets, plan strikes, or assess damage from its attacks as it retaliates for the US and Israeli bombings that have sparked a widening war in the region.
Iran wouldn't be the first to adopt that camera-hacking surveillance tactic. Earlier this week, the Financial Times reported that the Israeli military had accessed “nearly all” the traffic cameras in Iran's capital of Tehran and, in partnership with the CIA, used them to target the air strike that killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader. In Ukraine, the country's officials have warned for years that Russia has hacked consumer surveillance cameras to target strikes and spy on troop movements—while Ukrainian hackers have hijacked Russian cameras to surveil Russian troops and perhaps even to monitor its own attacks.
Exploiting the insecurity of networked civilian cameras is, in other words, becoming part of the standard operating procedures of armed forces around the world: A relatively cheap and accessible means of getting eyes on a target hundreds of thousands of miles away. “Now hacking cameras has become part of the playbook of military activity,” says Sergey Shykevich, who leads threat intelligence research at Check Point. “You get direct visibility without using any expensive military means such as satellites, often with better resolution.”
“For any attacker who is planning military activity, it's now a straightforward act to try it,” Shykevich adds, "because it's easy and provides very good value for your effort.”
In the latest example of that recon technique, Check Point found that hackers had attempted to exploit five distinct vulnerabilities in Hikvision and Dahua security cameras that would have allowed their takeover. Shykevish describes dozens of attempts—which Check Point says it blocked—across Bahrain, Cyprus, Kuwait, Lebanon, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, as well as hundreds more in Israel itself. Check Point notes it could view attempted intrusions only on networks equipped with its firewall network appliances and that its findings are likely skewed by the company's relatively larger customer base in Israel.
None of the five vulnerabilities are “complicated or sophisticated," Shykevich says. All of them have been patched in previous software updates from Hikvision and Dahua and were discovered years ago—one as early as 2017. Yet as with hackable bugs in so many internet-of-things devices, they persist in security cameras because owners rarely install updates or even become aware that they're available. (Hikvision and Dahua are both effectively banned in the United States due to security concerns; neither company responded to WIRED's request for comment on the hacking campaign.)
Check Point found that the camera-hacking attempts were largely timed to February 28 and March 1, just as the US and Israel were beginning their air strikes across Iran. Some of the attempted camera takeovers also occurred in mid-January, as protests spread across Iran and the US and Israel made preparations for their attacks. Check Point says it has tied the targeting of the cameras to three distinct groups it believes to be Iranian in origin, based on the servers and VPNs they used to carry out the campaign. Some of those servers, Shykevich notes, have been previously linked in particular to the Iranian hacker group known as Handala, which several cybersecurity companies have identified as working on behalf of Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security.
In fact, Check Point says it tracked similar Iranian targeting of cameras as early as last June during Israel's previous 12-day war with Iran. The head of Israel's National Cybersecurity Directorate, Yossi Karadi, also warned at the time that Iranian hackers were using civilian camera systems to target Israelis and had compromised a street camera across from the country's Weizmann Institute of Science before hitting it with a missile.
The joint US and Israeli strikes on Iran and the assassination of Khamenei have revealed, however, just how thoroughly Israel's own hackers—or those of its allies, including potentially the US—had penetrated Tehran's camera systems, too. Israeli intelligence sources speaking to the Financial Times described assembling the patterns of life of Iranian security guards around Khamenei based on the real-time data that traffic cameras provided across the city. “We knew Tehran like we know Jerusalem,” one source told the FT.
Prior to the current escalating war in the Middle East, the powerful surveillance role of hacked civilian cameras first became apparent in the midst of Russia's war in Ukraine. Ukrainian officials warned in January 2024, for instance, that Russian forces had hacked two security cameras in the capital of Kyiv to observe Ukrainian infrastructure targets and air defenses. “The aggressor used these cameras to collect data to prepare and adjust strikes on Kyiv,” reads a post from Ukraine's SSU intelligence service.
The SSU went so far, it writes, as to somehow disable 10,000 internet-connected cameras—it didn't reveal how—that could be used by Russia's military. “The SSU is calling on the owners of street webcams to stop online broadcasts from their devices, and on citizens to report any streams from such cameras,” the post reads.
Even as Ukraine has attempted to block that spying technique, it seems also to have adopted it. When the Ukrainian military used its own underwater drone to blow up a Russian submarine in the bay of Sevastopol in Crimea, it published video that defense-focused news outlet The Military Times noted looked very much like it had come from a hacked surveillance camera. A BBC report about Ukrainian hacktivist group One Fist notes more explicitly that they were commended by the Ukrainian government for work that included hacking cameras to watch Russia's movement of materiel across the Kerch Bridge between Russia and Crimea.
“The advantages of co-opting a civilian camera network are presence and expense,” says Peter W. Singer, a military-focused researcher at the New America Foundation and the author of the 2015 science fiction novel Ghost Fleet, which imagines future war scenarios. “The adversary's already done the work for you. They've placed cameras all around a city."
Singer notes that hacking those cameras is vastly cheaper and easier than relying on satellites or high-altitude drones. The trick is stealthier than drones, too, which are only viable when the enemy has few air defenses, and drones can often be detected by countersurveillance measures. Ground-level, hacked cameras also offer angles and perspectives that aren't possible with the bird's-eye view of a satellite or drone, he adds. All of that makes them powerful tools for reconnaissance, targeting, and what he calls “bomb damage assessment” after a strike.
Hacked cameras are a tough problem to solve, in part, because those who have the ability to secure them rarely suffer the consequences of that surveillance, says Beau Woods, a security researcher who formerly worked as an adviser to the US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. “The manufacturer of the device and the owner of the device are not the victim,” Woods says. “So the victim isn't in a position to control the tool that's used by the adversary."
The difficulty of pinning down responsibility for internet-connected consumer cameras means that their role in military surveillance is likely to persist for many years—and wars—to come.
“Who's liable, who's responsible, who's accountable?" Woods asks. “The camera itself is not directly causing the harm. But it's part of the kill chain.”
In your inbox: Our biggest stories, handpicked for you each day
What a Google subpoena response looks like—courtesy of the Epstein files
Big Story: The undersea cable that made the global internet possible
Everyone speaks incel now
Replay: Livestream on the hype, reality, and future of EVs
© 2026 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. WIRED may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our Affiliate Partnerships with retailers. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast. Ad Choices
Cut off a limb, and two more shall take its place.
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Cybercrime has seen a staggering rise over recent years, with past estimates putting it at a worldwide cost of $10.5 trillion in 2025. Thankfully, today the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) and Europol put the kibosh on the LeakBase database, a hacker forum operating across 14 different countries.
According to the press releases, the authorities seized "users' accounts, posts, credit details, private messages, and IP logs" of 142,000 members and their 215,000 messages. LeakBase was apparently a public forum in the English language, both factors that easily attract buyers and sellers of cybercrime software and stolen accounts.
The website now displays a large banner informing any visitors of the seizure, which took place between March 3 and 4 in a coordinated effort at Europol's headquarters in The Hague. According to the DoJ, LeakBase was home to data retrieved from multiple high-profile attacks, including "hundreds of millions of account credentials". Seized data also included "credit and debit card numbers, banking account and routing information [...] sensitive business and personally identifiable information."
The seizure wasn't just performed in cyberspace, too. Europol says that the operation included multiple arrests, house searches, and "knock-and-talk" interventions. The entire collective performed 100 policing actions targeting 37 of the most prolific users on the platform. Participating countries included the United States, eight member-states of Europol, as well as Australia, Canada, Malaysia, the UK, and Kosovo.
Cybercrime as a whole is accelerating, and the $10.5 trillion estimate for the 2025 cost is a staggering figure, ranking #3 in the world economy by GDP if it were considered a country, right behind the United States and China. Efforts by authorities around the globe are likewise speeding up, but they're playing a whack-a-mole game that's only likely to get harder by the day as AI attack automation becomes commonplace.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Bruno Ferreira is a contributing writer for Tom's Hardware. He has decades of experience with PC hardware and assorted sundries, alongside a career as a developer. He's obsessed with detail and has a tendency to ramble on the topics he loves. When not doing that, he's usually playing games, or at live music shows and festivals.
Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.
©
Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street,
New York,
NY 10036.
To be clear, wealth inequality is absolutely one of the most critical social problems today, just that simplistic numbers like this stifle useful discourse.
reply
reply
reply
reply
When the process that skews the wealth distribution has run this course, the billionaires and their cronies own everything and you have nothing do you think they'll show up to pay your child's education or your health care or your elderly care? They won't.They'll kick you to the curb and remove democracy since any real democracy is a direct threat to them. Then they'll continue their lavish parties on their yachts while you and your family go hungry in the slums.
They'll kick you to the curb and remove democracy since any real democracy is a direct threat to them. Then they'll continue their lavish parties on their yachts while you and your family go hungry in the slums.
reply
You know, who said our lord doesn't have a sense of humor? He could have said it any other way lol.I just don't understand how we can not have a category in the DSM for wealth-fixation, because after … I don't know, $100m, you have to be mentally ill to even be talking about, let alone pursuing, money. Shout out to Christ for being a radical pioneer on this issue.Tech needs Jesus in ways tech is too corrupted to understand.
I just don't understand how we can not have a category in the DSM for wealth-fixation, because after … I don't know, $100m, you have to be mentally ill to even be talking about, let alone pursuing, money. Shout out to Christ for being a radical pioneer on this issue.Tech needs Jesus in ways tech is too corrupted to understand.
Tech needs Jesus in ways tech is too corrupted to understand.
reply
Fortunately Peter Thiel is really into Christianity, so we're good!
reply
reply
It's wild that people that get this special exception so that their labor isn't fairly taxed in the way the average person is are now happy that AI is eliminating busywork jobs and now feel randos working average jobs are somehow exploiting the system.
reply
Not a threat, these people rarely feel truly threatened, but an obstruction.
reply
— John Steinbeck
reply
If anyone wonders why class consciousness seems to be impossible in the US, this and the parent comment lay it out. The belief in American exceptionalism and capitalism as a moral force and the defense of systemic racial hierarchies in a low trust society override all other concerns.
reply
I pay for my child's education and healthcare myself, and expect to continue to so whether Bezos is a trillionaire, a pauper, or anything in between. It ultimately has very little impact on my life.
reply
Generally speaking whether you realize this or not the economic system creates a competition between entities. And larger richer entities will subsume assimilate and destroy smaller entities when they're looking for that eternal growth with fixed resources.The argument to this always is that "it's not a zero sum game". Except that in practice it is. Economies are growing tiny few percent per year perhaps while the rich people are growing their wealth 10-20% per year. This is only possible by changing the wealth distribution making it effectively a zero sum game.That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.
The argument to this always is that "it's not a zero sum game". Except that in practice it is. Economies are growing tiny few percent per year perhaps while the rich people are growing their wealth 10-20% per year. This is only possible by changing the wealth distribution making it effectively a zero sum game.That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.
That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.
reply
Don't compare this year to last year. Compare this year to 10 years ago. To 20 years ago. Then say it's a zero sum game. Ask yourself if you would switch places with John D. Rockefeller. I would not.
reply
Amazon warehouse workers are paid enough to afford shelter (especially if they are working 7 days a week), or they are welcome to find a better job.> Generally speaking whether you realize this or not the economic system creates a competition between entities. And larger richer entities will subsume assimilate and destroy smaller entities when they're looking for that eternal growth with fixed resources.Yes, capitalism is competitive; that's the point. If a larger entity can perform better than a smaller one, then the smaller one doesn't need to exist.> The argument to this always is that "it's not a zero sum game". Except that in practice it is. Economies are growing tiny few percent per year perhaps while the rich people are growing their wealth 10-20% per year. This is only possible by changing the wealth distribution making it effectively a zero sum game.It's not a zero sum game, and you just pulled those numbers out of your ass.> That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.One person can't consume so much healthcare, shelter, or education that it prevents others from accessing it. Claiming otherwise is absurd.
> Generally speaking whether you realize this or not the economic system creates a competition between entities. And larger richer entities will subsume assimilate and destroy smaller entities when they're looking for that eternal growth with fixed resources.Yes, capitalism is competitive; that's the point. If a larger entity can perform better than a smaller one, then the smaller one doesn't need to exist.> The argument to this always is that "it's not a zero sum game". Except that in practice it is. Economies are growing tiny few percent per year perhaps while the rich people are growing their wealth 10-20% per year. This is only possible by changing the wealth distribution making it effectively a zero sum game.It's not a zero sum game, and you just pulled those numbers out of your ass.> That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.One person can't consume so much healthcare, shelter, or education that it prevents others from accessing it. Claiming otherwise is absurd.
Yes, capitalism is competitive; that's the point. If a larger entity can perform better than a smaller one, then the smaller one doesn't need to exist.> The argument to this always is that "it's not a zero sum game". Except that in practice it is. Economies are growing tiny few percent per year perhaps while the rich people are growing their wealth 10-20% per year. This is only possible by changing the wealth distribution making it effectively a zero sum game.It's not a zero sum game, and you just pulled those numbers out of your ass.> That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.One person can't consume so much healthcare, shelter, or education that it prevents others from accessing it. Claiming otherwise is absurd.
> The argument to this always is that "it's not a zero sum game". Except that in practice it is. Economies are growing tiny few percent per year perhaps while the rich people are growing their wealth 10-20% per year. This is only possible by changing the wealth distribution making it effectively a zero sum game.It's not a zero sum game, and you just pulled those numbers out of your ass.> That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.One person can't consume so much healthcare, shelter, or education that it prevents others from accessing it. Claiming otherwise is absurd.
It's not a zero sum game, and you just pulled those numbers out of your ass.> That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.One person can't consume so much healthcare, shelter, or education that it prevents others from accessing it. Claiming otherwise is absurd.
> That means wealthy individuals will outcompete poorer individuals for all resources such as housing, education, health care. Everything will be used to extract maximum wealth from the society until there's nothing more to take.One person can't consume so much healthcare, shelter, or education that it prevents others from accessing it. Claiming otherwise is absurd.
One person can't consume so much healthcare, shelter, or education that it prevents others from accessing it. Claiming otherwise is absurd.
reply
reply
Is Bezos supposed to use his billions to build some sort of machine to control the weather?
reply
According to this website:$116k — Senior software developer yearly salary. Interns makes more than that in US. Not that anybody's hiring interns anymore, but that's not the point.$142k — "basic" Aston Martin Vantage. The base model starts at $192k currently. I don't remember times where new AM was anywhere near 140k no matter how "basic".$182k — Fully loaded Tesla Model S. This one is the most egregious. More expensive than Aston Martin? Come on, a fully loaded Plaid is $115k with delivery right now.Haven't watched further since I was already too flabbergasted by how much those numbers didn't match my expectations.
$116k — Senior software developer yearly salary. Interns makes more than that in US. Not that anybody's hiring interns anymore, but that's not the point.$142k — "basic" Aston Martin Vantage. The base model starts at $192k currently. I don't remember times where new AM was anywhere near 140k no matter how "basic".$182k — Fully loaded Tesla Model S. This one is the most egregious. More expensive than Aston Martin? Come on, a fully loaded Plaid is $115k with delivery right now.Haven't watched further since I was already too flabbergasted by how much those numbers didn't match my expectations.
$142k — "basic" Aston Martin Vantage. The base model starts at $192k currently. I don't remember times where new AM was anywhere near 140k no matter how "basic".$182k — Fully loaded Tesla Model S. This one is the most egregious. More expensive than Aston Martin? Come on, a fully loaded Plaid is $115k with delivery right now.Haven't watched further since I was already too flabbergasted by how much those numbers didn't match my expectations.
$182k — Fully loaded Tesla Model S. This one is the most egregious. More expensive than Aston Martin? Come on, a fully loaded Plaid is $115k with delivery right now.Haven't watched further since I was already too flabbergasted by how much those numbers didn't match my expectations.
Haven't watched further since I was already too flabbergasted by how much those numbers didn't match my expectations.
reply
Some interns make more than that.I highly doubt the median intern does, even a SWE intern. Please think beyond SF/NYC.
I highly doubt the median intern does, even a SWE intern. Please think beyond SF/NYC.
reply
reply
Jeff had similar compensation as jassy when he was ceo. It's just that he is also the owner.
reply
reply
1. Bezos once said something along the lines of don't judge me by how much money I have, rather look at how may other wealthy people I've made. That view may be over simplifying some things, but it's not completely wrong either.2. Jassy or Solomon are just employees at the end of the day. Well paid, but they didn't create the company. The system rewards those that create the thing a lot more than those that run the thing.3. I'm vastly more critical of trust fund folks than someone like Bezos. He created true value in the economy and has been rewarded for that. Trust fund folks that simply live off that income are generally not productive members of society. They live the lifestyle then live purely because of a rich relative and, with rare exception, would be unable to have earned that wealth themself as their performance in society is poor relative to those who created the wealth.
2. Jassy or Solomon are just employees at the end of the day. Well paid, but they didn't create the company. The system rewards those that create the thing a lot more than those that run the thing.3. I'm vastly more critical of trust fund folks than someone like Bezos. He created true value in the economy and has been rewarded for that. Trust fund folks that simply live off that income are generally not productive members of society. They live the lifestyle then live purely because of a rich relative and, with rare exception, would be unable to have earned that wealth themself as their performance in society is poor relative to those who created the wealth.
3. I'm vastly more critical of trust fund folks than someone like Bezos. He created true value in the economy and has been rewarded for that. Trust fund folks that simply live off that income are generally not productive members of society. They live the lifestyle then live purely because of a rich relative and, with rare exception, would be unable to have earned that wealth themself as their performance in society is poor relative to those who created the wealth.
reply
reply
And how many have become more poor? I do not give a flying fuck about how many 5 percenter have made even more money. You either lift society as a whole or you let small part prosper at the expense of the rest.Some time ago conditions in the US / Canada were that many small people got the opportunity (The American Dream or whatever the fuck it is called).Now that window of opportunity keep shrinking.So no, fuck you James
Some time ago conditions in the US / Canada were that many small people got the opportunity (The American Dream or whatever the fuck it is called).Now that window of opportunity keep shrinking.So no, fuck you James
Now that window of opportunity keep shrinking.So no, fuck you James
So no, fuck you James
reply
I like to read a bit before bed.
reply
reply
_What can I, as an individual, do to counter wealth inequality?_It feels like breaking my fist against a brick wall.
It feels like breaking my fist against a brick wall.
reply
It's a huge undertaking, but you _can_ vote where your tax money gets sent. You can ensure it bootstraps a more equal system instead of propping-up an unequal one.I did this myself, and I feel good about having done it.
I did this myself, and I feel good about having done it.
reply
reply
You'll have to reassess what a "software engineer" salary looks like, but this is unironically part of the pathway towards living in a more-equal society where perhaps we shouldn't be earning 3x as much as everyone else just because we can invert a binary tree.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
If the only people paying real attention to gov't leaders are the greedy and power-hungry, then few decent people will run for office. And very few of those win.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
A lot of the time other web stores can offer the same value.
reply
If you feed this into a decent chatbot, or in an Ask HN, you might be surprised.
reply
reply
reply
But yes, generally this is how druglords work.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
It's like instead of growing out of being a toddler, he just became an oversized toddler who can use language to make himself sound like an adult. Makes total sense.
reply
reply
> What shaped your mindset?Having to listen to literal toddlers bitching about other people's success and dressing their little emotional tantrums into moralistic language to make it seem like they deserve any form of respect.
Having to listen to literal toddlers bitching about other people's success and dressing their little emotional tantrums into moralistic language to make it seem like they deserve any form of respect.
reply
reply
reply
Dictatorship is an almost inevitable outcome of huge wealth inequality.At the very least political checks and balances erode rapidly, because most politicians, judges, and media people love easy money. If a billionaire throws money at them they'll do whatever they're told to do.There aren't many systems that protect non-compliers from negative consequences when they're surrounded by corruption.
At the very least political checks and balances erode rapidly, because most politicians, judges, and media people love easy money. If a billionaire throws money at them they'll do whatever they're told to do.There aren't many systems that protect non-compliers from negative consequences when they're surrounded by corruption.
There aren't many systems that protect non-compliers from negative consequences when they're surrounded by corruption.
reply
Also, who said anything about Amazon? Why are you myopic? The whole system is rotten to the core when a single person can make it in a minute more than 99% of world's population and not use the money to advance the world. And before you mark (ha, get it?) me as a communist – I'm not against wealth and personal ownership. It's one thing to own a Ferrari and an expensive home, and is another to live in a cookie clicker world watching number go up and doing nothing with it but multiply the money.
reply
reply
There are two ways to diminish their role and position without robing them: reduce the inequality or stop worshiping the consumerism and focus in non-material ideas. Both are difficult but effective.
reply
Just put a cap on the size of a company. Break any corporation that has more than 150 employed people. Count independent contractors as employees if more than 1/3 of their income is dependent on any single customer.[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31317641
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31317641
reply
Yet any billionaire can quite happily retire to a private island with every possible need catered for. Want to travel to Japan for a photo, just ask your PA and there's a helicopter waiting taking you to a plane by the time you put your shoes on.Anyone with a wealth of $10m can live the life of a very well paid worker ($500k a year)Anyone with a wealth of $2m can live like the average American.Anyone with a wealth of $500k can live "like a king" in cheaper locations.But people carry on working.
Anyone with a wealth of $10m can live the life of a very well paid worker ($500k a year)Anyone with a wealth of $2m can live like the average American.Anyone with a wealth of $500k can live "like a king" in cheaper locations.But people carry on working.
Anyone with a wealth of $2m can live like the average American.Anyone with a wealth of $500k can live "like a king" in cheaper locations.But people carry on working.
Anyone with a wealth of $500k can live "like a king" in cheaper locations.But people carry on working.
But people carry on working.
reply
Collect enough money to run marketing campaigns for billionaires to give more money to charity. (I don't super trust politicians to tax them more and I am not sure that taxing them would even be effective given that there are always tax havens and loopholes, but persuasion should be possible, not extraordinarily expensive and have a high cost-benefit IMHO)
reply
They'll just counter it with an army of cheap tik tokers portraying you as soyjack and campaign of disinformation.
reply
reply
reply
I sold shaving cream door-to-door to pay for textbooks.I am speaking for myself and others like me.
I am speaking for myself and others like me.
reply
> ...we always look up at the oligarchs or sideways at the Jones, but we never look at those who are not doing as well as us.Which uses universal language to incorrectly declare the behavior of all humans. I assumed you were writing in good faith and reporting you find true and in my writing rejecting your claim.Maybe there's no one doing worse than you but I doubt it because here you are, with clear, well written english. Do you not offer them a helping hand?The real problem with your statement is that there are many of us who do look at and after those who are not doing as well as us (and some of those are quite wealthy). A group of us spend every Tuesday to collect food from stores with which to prepare a meal that we send to homeless encampments around town and then serve to anyone who shows up (usually around 100) for dinner. We provide a positive environment, build relationships, and help them to get clothes, toiletries, services, and emergency shelter. I and many others give substantial portions of our incomes to reduce poverty and disease across the world. I have been lucky to write software that has helped resolve the violence of genocide and open source software that has lifted businesses and made starting them more accessible. I have spent the core of my mind's considerations on trying to understand why the world functions as it does and how that can be improved, how we can move the standards higher, and how we can include everyone. In all of this there are many ways I have made decisions that make my wealth less, my comforts lower, and my time and mind more strained but I will not cease and I am not alone.So... When you claim that everyone only looks to those who are doing better I assert that you can speak for yourself. The belief that it's all every person for themselves and dog eat dog is false. It's bad for hope and bad for seeing reality.
Which uses universal language to incorrectly declare the behavior of all humans. I assumed you were writing in good faith and reporting you find true and in my writing rejecting your claim.Maybe there's no one doing worse than you but I doubt it because here you are, with clear, well written english. Do you not offer them a helping hand?The real problem with your statement is that there are many of us who do look at and after those who are not doing as well as us (and some of those are quite wealthy). A group of us spend every Tuesday to collect food from stores with which to prepare a meal that we send to homeless encampments around town and then serve to anyone who shows up (usually around 100) for dinner. We provide a positive environment, build relationships, and help them to get clothes, toiletries, services, and emergency shelter. I and many others give substantial portions of our incomes to reduce poverty and disease across the world. I have been lucky to write software that has helped resolve the violence of genocide and open source software that has lifted businesses and made starting them more accessible. I have spent the core of my mind's considerations on trying to understand why the world functions as it does and how that can be improved, how we can move the standards higher, and how we can include everyone. In all of this there are many ways I have made decisions that make my wealth less, my comforts lower, and my time and mind more strained but I will not cease and I am not alone.So... When you claim that everyone only looks to those who are doing better I assert that you can speak for yourself. The belief that it's all every person for themselves and dog eat dog is false. It's bad for hope and bad for seeing reality.
Maybe there's no one doing worse than you but I doubt it because here you are, with clear, well written english. Do you not offer them a helping hand?The real problem with your statement is that there are many of us who do look at and after those who are not doing as well as us (and some of those are quite wealthy). A group of us spend every Tuesday to collect food from stores with which to prepare a meal that we send to homeless encampments around town and then serve to anyone who shows up (usually around 100) for dinner. We provide a positive environment, build relationships, and help them to get clothes, toiletries, services, and emergency shelter. I and many others give substantial portions of our incomes to reduce poverty and disease across the world. I have been lucky to write software that has helped resolve the violence of genocide and open source software that has lifted businesses and made starting them more accessible. I have spent the core of my mind's considerations on trying to understand why the world functions as it does and how that can be improved, how we can move the standards higher, and how we can include everyone. In all of this there are many ways I have made decisions that make my wealth less, my comforts lower, and my time and mind more strained but I will not cease and I am not alone.So... When you claim that everyone only looks to those who are doing better I assert that you can speak for yourself. The belief that it's all every person for themselves and dog eat dog is false. It's bad for hope and bad for seeing reality.
The real problem with your statement is that there are many of us who do look at and after those who are not doing as well as us (and some of those are quite wealthy). A group of us spend every Tuesday to collect food from stores with which to prepare a meal that we send to homeless encampments around town and then serve to anyone who shows up (usually around 100) for dinner. We provide a positive environment, build relationships, and help them to get clothes, toiletries, services, and emergency shelter. I and many others give substantial portions of our incomes to reduce poverty and disease across the world. I have been lucky to write software that has helped resolve the violence of genocide and open source software that has lifted businesses and made starting them more accessible. I have spent the core of my mind's considerations on trying to understand why the world functions as it does and how that can be improved, how we can move the standards higher, and how we can include everyone. In all of this there are many ways I have made decisions that make my wealth less, my comforts lower, and my time and mind more strained but I will not cease and I am not alone.So... When you claim that everyone only looks to those who are doing better I assert that you can speak for yourself. The belief that it's all every person for themselves and dog eat dog is false. It's bad for hope and bad for seeing reality.
So... When you claim that everyone only looks to those who are doing better I assert that you can speak for yourself. The belief that it's all every person for themselves and dog eat dog is false. It's bad for hope and bad for seeing reality.
reply
reply
That's depressing and also embarrassing as a fellow dev
reply
reply
reply
reply
The issue is not that Jeff Bezos can buy an yacht and you can only buy an used RV for your weekend trips. The issue is that Jeff Bezos can buy a whole newspaper to shape public opinion and decide what laws get passed, and you can do nothing more than write a blog post about it.
reply
reply
If the last year has shown me anything, it's moneys not all it's cracked up to be on the power front.
reply
reply
But with a lot more power than him.(At least for the moment)
(At least for the moment)
reply
https://www.epi.org/blog/wage-inequality-fell-in-2023-amid-a...
reply
From the title of your page
reply
reply
reply
40k is what you call rich?
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
Is Bezos taking money out of my pocket or preventing me from buying food, shelter, healthcare, or other services I need or want?
reply
reply
reply
reply
He risked it all and worked hard to start one of the world's biggest companies, he shouldn't be rewarded for that?I really don't get it.
I really don't get it.
reply
reply
How many people can do that? Not me.
reply
The answer is simple: By definition only about 100-300 people.There's only 100 of the "worlds biggest companies" (assuming this refers to the top 100). And companies are usually started by 1-3 people.Similarly: There's usually only 4 participants in the top 4 of a tournament bracket.(The question is a bit: what does "can" even mean in this context and the answer im hinting at here: It's not individual skill that creates companies ex-nihilo. It's our economic system that produces companies.)
There's only 100 of the "worlds biggest companies" (assuming this refers to the top 100). And companies are usually started by 1-3 people.Similarly: There's usually only 4 participants in the top 4 of a tournament bracket.(The question is a bit: what does "can" even mean in this context and the answer im hinting at here: It's not individual skill that creates companies ex-nihilo. It's our economic system that produces companies.)
Similarly: There's usually only 4 participants in the top 4 of a tournament bracket.(The question is a bit: what does "can" even mean in this context and the answer im hinting at here: It's not individual skill that creates companies ex-nihilo. It's our economic system that produces companies.)
(The question is a bit: what does "can" even mean in this context and the answer im hinting at here: It's not individual skill that creates companies ex-nihilo. It's our economic system that produces companies.)
reply
reply
I think we can both agree that hard work and one of a kind achievement like this should be rewarded. But I suspect we will disagree on whether the reward should have a limit or not. I don't want Bezos to give up his wealth and live on 50k/year. But I don't want him to be so wealthy he can influence politics both home and abroad.
reply
Should he be able to won every single media corporation? He shouldn't and he can't, because there are laws to protect against monopolies. Same thing for factories and farms.Should he control politicians? No, but in theory people still control politicians since they can vote them out. If there's a problem where politicians are willing to get bribed, perhaps the solution would be to impose more transparency and harsher penalties for that.
Should he control politicians? No, but in theory people still control politicians since they can vote them out. If there's a problem where politicians are willing to get bribed, perhaps the solution would be to impose more transparency and harsher penalties for that.
reply
The problem is that bribery is completely legal in the United States, donating money to a PAC is completely legal and without a limit. I'm not talking about money under the table in a suitcase kind of thing - I'm talking about the situations like recent OpenAI donation of $25M to Trump's PAC - do you think after such donation he is more likely to do what OpenAI wants, or what his voters want? It's not even about Trump specifically - the entire American system is structured in such a way that this is allowed, billionaries from both sides donate to politicians to help them win and achieve their goals, this is the real power of the money they make and this is the problem I have with it.>> I'm for freedom.Someone already decides that you pay taxes on the money you make, and presumably will come and take it from you by force if you don't pay - the only difference is the percentage value. Or are you commenting from somewhere that doesn't have a functional tax system?
>> I'm for freedom.Someone already decides that you pay taxes on the money you make, and presumably will come and take it from you by force if you don't pay - the only difference is the percentage value. Or are you commenting from somewhere that doesn't have a functional tax system?
Someone already decides that you pay taxes on the money you make, and presumably will come and take it from you by force if you don't pay - the only difference is the percentage value. Or are you commenting from somewhere that doesn't have a functional tax system?
reply
And a lot of what he did risk was other people's money.Which is how Amazon works anyway. Everyone who relies on Amazon - the authors, the drop shippers, the small traders, the warehouse staff, the drivers, the white collar employees - can be rug-pulled at any moment for any random reason.And Amazon lives off indirect government welfare. Pay at the low end is so miserly nearly a quarter of employees rely on SNAP.
Which is how Amazon works anyway. Everyone who relies on Amazon - the authors, the drop shippers, the small traders, the warehouse staff, the drivers, the white collar employees - can be rug-pulled at any moment for any random reason.And Amazon lives off indirect government welfare. Pay at the low end is so miserly nearly a quarter of employees rely on SNAP.
And Amazon lives off indirect government welfare. Pay at the low end is so miserly nearly a quarter of employees rely on SNAP.
reply
What exactly did he risk that justifies this reward?> and worked hardHow hard exactly? How much harder than a doctor, firefighter, waiter, or just your average joe could he possibly have worked to justify earning a million times more.> to start one of the world's biggest companies, he shouldn't be rewarded for that?No, he really, really shouldn't. Not that much, not even remotely that much.> I really don't get it.It is absolute poison for society, for the whole of humanity, that a single person can own that much, hold that much power, with zero accountability.
> and worked hardHow hard exactly? How much harder than a doctor, firefighter, waiter, or just your average joe could he possibly have worked to justify earning a million times more.> to start one of the world's biggest companies, he shouldn't be rewarded for that?No, he really, really shouldn't. Not that much, not even remotely that much.> I really don't get it.It is absolute poison for society, for the whole of humanity, that a single person can own that much, hold that much power, with zero accountability.
How hard exactly? How much harder than a doctor, firefighter, waiter, or just your average joe could he possibly have worked to justify earning a million times more.> to start one of the world's biggest companies, he shouldn't be rewarded for that?No, he really, really shouldn't. Not that much, not even remotely that much.> I really don't get it.It is absolute poison for society, for the whole of humanity, that a single person can own that much, hold that much power, with zero accountability.
> to start one of the world's biggest companies, he shouldn't be rewarded for that?No, he really, really shouldn't. Not that much, not even remotely that much.> I really don't get it.It is absolute poison for society, for the whole of humanity, that a single person can own that much, hold that much power, with zero accountability.
No, he really, really shouldn't. Not that much, not even remotely that much.> I really don't get it.It is absolute poison for society, for the whole of humanity, that a single person can own that much, hold that much power, with zero accountability.
> I really don't get it.It is absolute poison for society, for the whole of humanity, that a single person can own that much, hold that much power, with zero accountability.
It is absolute poison for society, for the whole of humanity, that a single person can own that much, hold that much power, with zero accountability.
reply
No he didn't. He tried a business venture like thousands of other founders on this site, and got insanely lucky.
reply
Was he lucky? He had an intuition that books could be sold on the internet because you don't need to test them out before buying. Luck might have been part of it, but I hadn't thought of that in 1990-something, I was playing AOE II all day instead.
reply
The founder founded the company but the billions were earned by the thousands of employees working for the company. The founder alone would not have earned a single dollar without the employees and there would not be a company the be employed by without the founder.If you start a business, you create a company to isolate the business risk from your personal risk, if the business does not work out, the company goes down, the founder should be fine. You will probably risk some of your personal money as a founder in many cases, but how much of a reward do you want for that? If you risk a million and make a billion, is that not more than enough? Did you really start a business where you expected to fail with more than ninety-nine point nine percent?On the other hand, even if the founder would not get an oversized portion of the profit, because that money would get distributed to many employees or many sold products, the effect is relatively small, it would neither make all employees earn millions nor the product significantly cheaper. Bushiness owners making billions is just being in a position where you can take a little money from very many others and that adds up.Also founders getting rich is capitalism not working as intended. The point of an economy is to provide goods and services that people want as efficiently as possible. Business making a lot of profit means that things are not as cheap as they could be and competition is supposed to correct that. Making a profit is a mean to an end, an incentive for the creation of businesses to satisfy demands, it is not the end itself.
If you start a business, you create a company to isolate the business risk from your personal risk, if the business does not work out, the company goes down, the founder should be fine. You will probably risk some of your personal money as a founder in many cases, but how much of a reward do you want for that? If you risk a million and make a billion, is that not more than enough? Did you really start a business where you expected to fail with more than ninety-nine point nine percent?On the other hand, even if the founder would not get an oversized portion of the profit, because that money would get distributed to many employees or many sold products, the effect is relatively small, it would neither make all employees earn millions nor the product significantly cheaper. Bushiness owners making billions is just being in a position where you can take a little money from very many others and that adds up.Also founders getting rich is capitalism not working as intended. The point of an economy is to provide goods and services that people want as efficiently as possible. Business making a lot of profit means that things are not as cheap as they could be and competition is supposed to correct that. Making a profit is a mean to an end, an incentive for the creation of businesses to satisfy demands, it is not the end itself.
On the other hand, even if the founder would not get an oversized portion of the profit, because that money would get distributed to many employees or many sold products, the effect is relatively small, it would neither make all employees earn millions nor the product significantly cheaper. Bushiness owners making billions is just being in a position where you can take a little money from very many others and that adds up.Also founders getting rich is capitalism not working as intended. The point of an economy is to provide goods and services that people want as efficiently as possible. Business making a lot of profit means that things are not as cheap as they could be and competition is supposed to correct that. Making a profit is a mean to an end, an incentive for the creation of businesses to satisfy demands, it is not the end itself.
Also founders getting rich is capitalism not working as intended. The point of an economy is to provide goods and services that people want as efficiently as possible. Business making a lot of profit means that things are not as cheap as they could be and competition is supposed to correct that. Making a profit is a mean to an end, an incentive for the creation of businesses to satisfy demands, it is not the end itself.
reply
reply
reply
In any case, in my opinion, blaming Bezos for being Bezos, is looking in the wrong direction. The real issue is; who enabled this? And a good place to start, is to look at yourselves in a mirror.We did this. All of us.
We did this. All of us.
reply
Bezos and related are personally responsible for creating the system that allows this.
reply
reply
reply
reply
Yes there is growing wealth inequality in the world. Because we invented a way to turn capital in to more capital without humans.Bezos is just the first of many. He also has on average made other people richer than he has pocketed, he doesn't own more than 50% of Amazon, his investors (shareholders, pension funds, the US government) have all done incredibly well out of his vision and enterprise.I love Prime, I love AWS, I love that I can get rare books over night at a great price. Should he be wealth capped? Should he innovate less as he get's more? Not as long as the primary way he makes money is through computers, that would just be self defeating. As someone who lives in Europe, the tech sector is America's growth engine and has defined the gap between the two economies, we'd love a Jeff Bezos.
Bezos is just the first of many. He also has on average made other people richer than he has pocketed, he doesn't own more than 50% of Amazon, his investors (shareholders, pension funds, the US government) have all done incredibly well out of his vision and enterprise.I love Prime, I love AWS, I love that I can get rare books over night at a great price. Should he be wealth capped? Should he innovate less as he get's more? Not as long as the primary way he makes money is through computers, that would just be self defeating. As someone who lives in Europe, the tech sector is America's growth engine and has defined the gap between the two economies, we'd love a Jeff Bezos.
I love Prime, I love AWS, I love that I can get rare books over night at a great price. Should he be wealth capped? Should he innovate less as he get's more? Not as long as the primary way he makes money is through computers, that would just be self defeating. As someone who lives in Europe, the tech sector is America's growth engine and has defined the gap between the two economies, we'd love a Jeff Bezos.
reply
Bezos is making a lot of money. But it doesn't mean it makes the world better. Prime or AWS can still work fine without having Bezos making tons of money
reply
reply
reply
reply
No fuck it.
reply
I mean I know(at the back of my head) that HN is owned by Y Combinator which is all about creating startups that explode and make you a billionaire. But personally I come here for the actual hacking - gameboy games running on a pregnancy test, that kind of thing. Bezos making more money than GDP of a small country in a day is a thing that kinda deserves us shaking our fists at it - it means the global system is broken, if one man can have this kind of power. But in a way, it's nothing new - emperors and khans had more riches than any current billionaire, comparatively. On the other hand, they were actual rulers, not just "regular" citizens.
reply
I don't get the outrage. Our system needs incentives to get people to do great work. If you do one-of-a-kind work, shouldn't you get rewarded proportionally?There is 1 Amazon. It's not easy to create Amazon from scratch.
There is 1 Amazon. It's not easy to create Amazon from scratch.
reply
Are you allowed to think that the reward that Bezos is reaping isn't proportional to his achievements?
reply
Who should decide what's proportional, though? Should there be a committee that says, Bezos is capped at X billions, and any money he makes after that gets confiscated?
reply
reply
reply
reply
If you don't want to pay taxes i take it you don't want to live in a civilized society, then you are welcome to leave.
reply
reply
How about a government that acts for the good of the people, rather than for the companies?> gets confiscated?funny way to refer to taxation
> gets confiscated?funny way to refer to taxation
funny way to refer to taxation
reply
And yeah, I don't have the answer to what the number is for people like Bezos. Maybe there isn't one - maybe he can own whatever amount of money he likes, but every person with wealth above 1BN is banned forever for making politican donations, either personally or through proxies. Enjoy your life with your hard earned money, do whatever you like - but don't use it to influence politics.Again, I'm not seriously suggesting this - just saying that as societies we determine many things which are right for the greater whole already, why not this? And I really want the answer to be "because we haven't sat down to think about it yet" and not "because Mr Bezos gave us 100M last year for our campaign we so won't be looking into it".
Again, I'm not seriously suggesting this - just saying that as societies we determine many things which are right for the greater whole already, why not this? And I really want the answer to be "because we haven't sat down to think about it yet" and not "because Mr Bezos gave us 100M last year for our campaign we so won't be looking into it".
reply
That's not the type of conversations I hear, though (including from you). People always seem to focus on punishing people that are more successful. And that can only happen by force, where somebody has to decide what you can and cannot do and then steal whatever you lawfully earned.
reply
What is proportional? Shall we crown him god? Allow him to keep slaves? Put him on a pedestal? Do you even know how much is it: a billion? If you strip him off 95% of his wealth, he'll still have more than you can achieve in your 10 lives. He is disproportionately well compensated.
reply
A triple whammy
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Update - March 5: This bundle is so popular that it has now sold out. However, there's an alternative Newegg bundle for $986 that gets you the excellent 9800X3D, a B850 motherboard, and 32GB of RAM.
More Newegg bundle goodness today: a new deal pairs a premium Asus ROG Strix X870E-E Gaming WiFi Motherboard with 32GB of Corsair Vengeance RGB DDR5-6400 RAM and AMD's Ryzen 7 9850X3D CPU for $ 1,109.99. The combo deal saves you a tidy $236.99 off the list price of $1346.98. If you're going to use the fastest gaming processor on the market for a high-spec gaming PC, it's good to pair it with a premium, feature-rich motherboard.
We've reviewed the Asus ROG Strix X870E-E Gaming WiFi motherboard, awarding it 4 out of 5 stars and touting it as one of the best motherboard options in the $500 bracket. This mobo actually comes with three PCIe 5.0 M.2 sockets, a further two PCIe 4.0 M.2 sockets, and an abundance of precious USB ports. Excellent voltage regulation and 18+2+2 power solution rated for 110A per stage.
Corsair's Vengeance RAM is also a very popular brand name and a popular choice for memory in the PC building community. This kit offers 2x 16GB paired sticks for a total of 32GB of DDR5 RAM at 6400MT/s, a sweet spot speed for AMD processors on the AM5 platform. In the current climate, this RAM is priced at $437, but combining it with the processor and motherboard here gets you the same kit for the relative price of just $201. Still inflated, but as good as it gets in 2026.
Plus, any purchase also comes with two "free" gifts: an Asus TUF Gaming M4 Air lightweight gaming mouse ($55.99) and a copy of the Crimson Desert ($70) video game.
This Newegg bundle combines the fastest gaming CPU, AMD's Ryzen 7 9850X3D, with an MSI MAG X870 Tomahawk WiFi motherboard, and 32GB of Corsair Vengeance DDR5-6400 Memory, for the start of a new gaming PC build.
This Newegg bundle combines the fastest gaming CPU, AMD's Ryzen 7 9850X3D, an Asus ROG Strix X870E-E Gaming WiFi motherboard, and 32GB of Corsair Vengeance DDR5-6400 Memory. Plus, any purchase also comes with two free gifts: an Asus TUF Gaming M4 Air lightweight gaming mouse and a copy of the Crimson Desert video game.
Perfectly complementing the above duo of components is AMD's Ryzen 7 9850X3D CPU. This 8-core AM5 processor is now the fastest kid on the block when it comes to gaming performance, surpassing the 9800X3D, thanks to a slight power boost. You can see how the processor performed in our benchmarking from the table below. It's close, but the 9850X3D edges out a lead over its stablemate, the 9800X3D.
In this current climate, all RAM kits are hitting extortionate price highs. Depending on the brand name and performance, faster memory kits with tighter timings can cost significantly more. If you need RAM for your system, get it sooner, rather than later, as there is currently no end in sight to this financial burden on PC enthusiasts.
If you're looking for more savings, check out our Best PC Hardware deals for a range of products, or dive deeper into our specialized SSD and Storage Deals, Hard Drive Deals, Gaming Monitor Deals, Graphics Card Deals, Gaming Chair, Best Wi-Fi Routers, Best Motherboard, or CPU Deals pages.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Stewart Bendle is a deals and coupon writer at Tom's Hardware. A firm believer in “Bang for the buck” Stewart likes to research the best prices and coupon codes for hardware and build PCs that have a great price for performance ratio.
Tom's Hardware is part of Future US Inc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site.
©
Future US, Inc. Full 7th Floor, 130 West 42nd Street,
New York,
NY 10036.
In midlife, women are told to expect disruption. Sleep may become lighter, nights can feel warmer, and energy harder to come by. Hormones shift, and the body adjusts. But for a large number of women, something else is happening as well: Their airway is collapsing dozens of times an hour while they sleep.
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), once framed as a disorder primarily affecting older, heavier men, is increasingly recognized as a far more complex and often undetected condition, particularly in women navigating perimenopause and menopause.
OSA occurs when the upper airway narrows or collapses during sleep, oxygen levels dip, and the brain briefly rouses the body to restart breathing. For years it was framed as a single disorder with a familiar face. Now researchers understand it as far more complex: a heterogeneous condition shaped by different biological mechanisms and expressed through different symptom patterns. Yet the older, larger, male archetype still shapes who gets diagnosed and who doesn't.
A recent projection in The Lancet Respiratory Medicine journal suggests the problem is far bigger—and more female—than once thought. Researchers estimate that by 2050 nearly 77 million US adults aged 30 to 69 will have OSA, including a 65 percent relative increase in prevalence among women, to around 30.4 million, compared with a 19 percent relative increase among men. The increase reflects aging populations and rising obesity, but hopefully also something more basic: better detection.
Carlos Nunez, chief medical officer at ResMed, which supported the analysis, explains that while over a billion people in the world have sleep apnea, in some countries as many as 90 percent are undiagnosed and untreated. “It is a condition that often lives in anonymity. Most people don't realize they have it, because you're asleep when it happens,” he says.
Although OSA can appear at any age—even in children—risk rises, as declining muscle tone makes it harder for the airway to stay open during sleep. For women, however, menopause is a pivotal moment. Studies show that postmenopausal women had a substantially higher risk of OSA. One analysis of a US health survey found postmenopausal women were around 57 percent more likely to report sleep apnea symptoms than premenopausal women, even after adjusting for body weight.
“Women have hormonal protection from estrogens until menopause,” says Marie-Pierre St-Onge, director of the Center of Excellence for Sleep & Circadian Research at Columbia University. Around that time, she explains, fat distribution shifts toward the neck and upper body, increasing pressure on the airway.
Research suggests that estrogen and progesterone have protective effects on breathing regulation and upper-airway muscle activity. As these hormone levels decline after menopause, that influence wanes, which may contribute to a greater likelihood of airway collapse during sleep.
Rashmi Nisha Aurora, professor of medicine and director of Women's Sleep Medicine Initiatives at NYU Grossman School of Medicine, describes estrogen as a major antioxidant defense. When it declines, protection against oxidative stress weakens, just as OSA itself subjects the body to repeated oxygen drops and inflammatory strain. The result, she argues, is a physiological “double whammy” increasing strain on the heart and metabolic system.
Pregnancy is another time when hormonal fluctuations temporarily increase vulnerability to OSA, Aurora notes.
The paradox is that menopause is also when OSA is easiest to misinterpret, as women's symptoms—which can differ from men's—include night sweats, fatigue, and restless sleep, which overlap with menopause itself. “That's where it's really overlooked,” Aurora says. “Part of the issue has been case identification and screening.”
The checklists physicians rely on—loud snoring, witnessed breathing pauses, excessive daytime sleepiness—were largely developed and validated in male or mixed cohorts. Many of the most widely used tools for measuring hypersomnia, including the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, were not validated in women across age groups. And the symptom that often triggers CPAP referral, such as excessive daytime sleepiness, may be described or experienced differently by women.
Women's complaints often lean toward insomnia, mood changes, headaches, or persistent fatigue rather than overt sleepiness. They may report nocturia—“so getting up to use the restroom more often can be a sign,” Aurora says—or fragmented sleep that feels indistinguishable from stress.
Meanwhile, the breathing events themselves can be quieter. A woman “may actually stop breathing and be suffocating multiple times an hour, but it sounds quite quiet,” Nunez says. That subtlety can send patients down familiar detours: insomnia, anxiety, “even depression or other mental health conditions,” as he puts it. Morning headaches or waking sweaty may be dismissed as hot flashes rather than a sign of sleep apnea.
There's another complication: OSA is not one disease. Researchers increasingly describe it in terms of phenotypes—clusters of symptoms—and underlying biological “endotypes.” A study of 1,886 women diagnosed with OSA found that while many present in the classical snoring-and-sleepiness pattern, others fall into quieter, less obvious categories, including women with few symptoms but significant comorbidities.
Even so-called mild apnea can be physiologically significant. Fifteen breathing disruptions an hour, which is classified as mild, means oxygen deprivation roughly every four minutes throughout the night. Over time, those repeated drops are associated with vascular injury, metabolic dysfunction, and increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Growing evidence also links untreated OSA to cognitive decline and Alzheimer's.
Although treatment remains straightforward in principle—continuous positive airway pressure, or CPAP, uses pressurized air to keep the airway open—some researchers are beginning to ask whether response to therapy differs by sex.
“There's evidence that possibly responses to therapy for obstructive sleep apnea might be different in men versus women,” Aurora says. Her team has observed preliminary differences in oxidative stress markers between men and women treated with CPAP. “We need to look at more targeted therapy, more precision medicine and personalized medicine,” she says.
Nunez argues that both sexes benefit from CPAP but does note that the devices are evolving. Algorithms can now adjust pressure dynamically and help account for the fact that “women and their airways respond to different pressures, respond to different parts of the breathing cycle differently than a man will.”
“We're going to see more advances like that as therapy like this becomes ever more personalized,” he says.
Despite a number of recent studies looking at women and sleep apnea, researchers are emphatic: Further research is needed. Changing hormones often mean women are excluded from certain medical studies, says Aurora, but “that's exactly why we need to be studied, because we are complicated. We need to be in those clinical trials,” she says.
For now, though, the most urgent shift may be cultural.
“We need to get the word out there more,” Aurora says. “There has to be education at a patient level and provider level. We have to build awareness: It's not just insomnia; it may be a sign of something else. It's not just that your bladder is weakening; it may be a sign of something else.”
Nunez agrees that the problem runs deep. “We've had a very paternalistic health care system in many countries for too long,” he says. “We mostly study how drugs work in men, how treatments work in men, and now we're finally recognizing we have to study how things work in everyone.”
In your inbox: Our biggest stories, handpicked for you each day
What a Google subpoena response looks like—courtesy of the Epstein files
Big Story: The undersea cable that made the global internet possible
Everyone speaks incel now
Replay: Livestream on the hype, reality, and future of EVs
© 2026 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. WIRED may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our Affiliate Partnerships with retailers. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast. Ad Choices
And sure enough, my reading of it left the impression the OAI conditions were basically "DoW won't do anything which violates the rules DoW sets for itself."
reply
He also claimed that they would build rules into the model the DoD would use, preventing misuse. Aka he claims OpenAI will quickly solve alignment and build it right in...I wouldn't hold my breath.
reply
reply
reply
Probably because most don't want to end up in russia?
reply
It wasn't as if there weren't any other contractors like Snowden, but there were no other whistleblowers like Snowdenand where'd that leave him? In a country far away from his motherland and being worried about his safety. Being called god knows what by the country at home and most general people don't even care.Snowden didn't do it for the money, he did it for what he felt was right and that's so rare.Its so sad how when I searched up on Snowden on youtube, the first thing I found was ex CIA agent claiming Snowden wasn't innocent and how he had to befriend russia but at the same time, that was only because US would have literally killed him and made an example out of him to whistleblow about such a large-scale mass surveillance“What kind of asshole reveals the fact we're the assholes, then doesn't let us kill him!” is one heck of a comment I found.Also, We will charge the whistleblower with death but we will not take any action against the act which was whistleblown in the first place (:
and where'd that leave him? In a country far away from his motherland and being worried about his safety. Being called god knows what by the country at home and most general people don't even care.Snowden didn't do it for the money, he did it for what he felt was right and that's so rare.Its so sad how when I searched up on Snowden on youtube, the first thing I found was ex CIA agent claiming Snowden wasn't innocent and how he had to befriend russia but at the same time, that was only because US would have literally killed him and made an example out of him to whistleblow about such a large-scale mass surveillance“What kind of asshole reveals the fact we're the assholes, then doesn't let us kill him!” is one heck of a comment I found.Also, We will charge the whistleblower with death but we will not take any action against the act which was whistleblown in the first place (:
Snowden didn't do it for the money, he did it for what he felt was right and that's so rare.Its so sad how when I searched up on Snowden on youtube, the first thing I found was ex CIA agent claiming Snowden wasn't innocent and how he had to befriend russia but at the same time, that was only because US would have literally killed him and made an example out of him to whistleblow about such a large-scale mass surveillance“What kind of asshole reveals the fact we're the assholes, then doesn't let us kill him!” is one heck of a comment I found.Also, We will charge the whistleblower with death but we will not take any action against the act which was whistleblown in the first place (:
Its so sad how when I searched up on Snowden on youtube, the first thing I found was ex CIA agent claiming Snowden wasn't innocent and how he had to befriend russia but at the same time, that was only because US would have literally killed him and made an example out of him to whistleblow about such a large-scale mass surveillance“What kind of asshole reveals the fact we're the assholes, then doesn't let us kill him!” is one heck of a comment I found.Also, We will charge the whistleblower with death but we will not take any action against the act which was whistleblown in the first place (:
“What kind of asshole reveals the fact we're the assholes, then doesn't let us kill him!” is one heck of a comment I found.Also, We will charge the whistleblower with death but we will not take any action against the act which was whistleblown in the first place (:
Also, We will charge the whistleblower with death but we will not take any action against the act which was whistleblown in the first place (:
reply
Russia stopped him because US had cancelled his passport.
reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident
reply
reply
reply
All Lawful Use is a tautology with fascists because they cannot break laws by definition.
reply
Soviet Union - The show trials of the 1930s were conducted with full legal apparatus: confessions, judges, verdicts. Stalin's purges operated through legally constituted troikas. Entirely "lawful" by Soviet law.East Germany (DDR) - The Stasi's surveillance and harassment programmes were codified in law. When the wall fell, many Stasi officers genuinely argued their conduct was legal under GDR statute: a defence that West German courts largely rejected.Castro's Cuba - Mass executions after the revolution were conducted by legally constituted revolutionary tribunals. Castro explicitly defended this on legality grounds when challenged by foreign press in 1959.Chavez/Maduro's Venezuela - Suppression of opposition media, jailing of political opponents was consistently defended as operating within Venezuelan law, which was progressively rewritten to make it so. Classic self-referential legality.Mao's Cultural Revolution - The revolutionary committees had legal standing. Persecution of intellectuals and landlords proceeded through formal (if kangaroo) legal processes.
East Germany (DDR) - The Stasi's surveillance and harassment programmes were codified in law. When the wall fell, many Stasi officers genuinely argued their conduct was legal under GDR statute: a defence that West German courts largely rejected.Castro's Cuba - Mass executions after the revolution were conducted by legally constituted revolutionary tribunals. Castro explicitly defended this on legality grounds when challenged by foreign press in 1959.Chavez/Maduro's Venezuela - Suppression of opposition media, jailing of political opponents was consistently defended as operating within Venezuelan law, which was progressively rewritten to make it so. Classic self-referential legality.Mao's Cultural Revolution - The revolutionary committees had legal standing. Persecution of intellectuals and landlords proceeded through formal (if kangaroo) legal processes.
Castro's Cuba - Mass executions after the revolution were conducted by legally constituted revolutionary tribunals. Castro explicitly defended this on legality grounds when challenged by foreign press in 1959.Chavez/Maduro's Venezuela - Suppression of opposition media, jailing of political opponents was consistently defended as operating within Venezuelan law, which was progressively rewritten to make it so. Classic self-referential legality.Mao's Cultural Revolution - The revolutionary committees had legal standing. Persecution of intellectuals and landlords proceeded through formal (if kangaroo) legal processes.
Chavez/Maduro's Venezuela - Suppression of opposition media, jailing of political opponents was consistently defended as operating within Venezuelan law, which was progressively rewritten to make it so. Classic self-referential legality.Mao's Cultural Revolution - The revolutionary committees had legal standing. Persecution of intellectuals and landlords proceeded through formal (if kangaroo) legal processes.
Mao's Cultural Revolution - The revolutionary committees had legal standing. Persecution of intellectuals and landlords proceeded through formal (if kangaroo) legal processes.
reply
reply
reply
> if the comment you've posted responds meaningfully to the discussion at hand.https://mirror.org/
https://mirror.org/
reply
If mirror dot org actually existed, you might want to look into it, because your long list of examples has one related to 1930s Germany, and the rest has nothing to do with the political definition of "fascism"?Your point about legality was valid, but you're undermining it with the sarcasm.
Your point about legality was valid, but you're undermining it with the sarcasm.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ur-Fascismhttps://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-su...
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-su...
reply
reply
DoD: I will make it legal.
reply
reply
Ignoring the definition, what would be required for individual alignment is exactly the same as collective alignment. The only difference is the goals and who writes them, for the LLM it is being somehow forced to follow those rules no matter what.
reply
reply
[1] https://privacy.openai.com/policies?modal=take-control
reply
The bigger picture is that the DoW got what it wanted and it got it by threatening one company while the other did its bidding.
reply
reply
See PRISM.
reply
https://www.wyden.senate.gov/issues/domestic-surveillance-re...He may not be perfect on everything, but elect more people like him and it starts moving the needle. Or elect some more that are even more opposed to some of these things. It doesn't happen overnight. Change is difficult.
He may not be perfect on everything, but elect more people like him and it starts moving the needle. Or elect some more that are even more opposed to some of these things. It doesn't happen overnight. Change is difficult.
reply
I agree, though notice that the GOP/MAGA have and continue to make enormous changes. The difference is that they believe they can do it while others sit around talking about hopelessness and powerlessness. The only difference is belief.
reply
You're conceding that the name has already changed, without voting.> It doesn't change if the government wants mass surveillance.That can be prevented by Congress with enough political will.
> It doesn't change if the government wants mass surveillance.That can be prevented by Congress with enough political will.
That can be prevented by Congress with enough political will.
reply
reply
reply
Did voting for Bernie Sanders in the last two primaries (especially the ones when Trump won for the first time) amount to anything?I wonder how long can the American public keep the self delusion that the elections are anything but a theater for the naive, to keep the pretense the public has any say in things that matter.How much has the current administration asked the public about going to war with Iran?
I wonder how long can the American public keep the self delusion that the elections are anything but a theater for the naive, to keep the pretense the public has any say in things that matter.How much has the current administration asked the public about going to war with Iran?
How much has the current administration asked the public about going to war with Iran?
reply
Here is the 2026 Senate map [1]. Do you suggest any of them will flip over Iran? (I don't. The folks who regularly vote simply don't show any sign that this is a priority. Folks who stay at home grumbling don't matter.)[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_Senate_elec...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_Senate_elec...
reply
He didn't win the primaries though. It would have amounted to something if he got enough votes.
reply
2) If he won the primaries, there is still no guarantee that that would have amounted to anything.First, he might not have won the elections (mainstream media and the whole ruling elites were heavily against him). And even if he won, he might not have been able to do much against the permanent state.I still think the main cause of Trump's wins is the deep disillusionment of the democratic voters by Obama's failure (inability/unwillingness) to impact a meaningful change.
First, he might not have won the elections (mainstream media and the whole ruling elites were heavily against him). And even if he won, he might not have been able to do much against the permanent state.I still think the main cause of Trump's wins is the deep disillusionment of the democratic voters by Obama's failure (inability/unwillingness) to impact a meaningful change.
I still think the main cause of Trump's wins is the deep disillusionment of the democratic voters by Obama's failure (inability/unwillingness) to impact a meaningful change.
reply
reply
Sadly, it is also factually correct (i.e. not delusional).Which of my statements are you contesting?From my point of view, your stance (play fairly, according to the rules set by your stronger opponent) is delusional. Note that the opponent is not 'republicans', but the whole ruling elites.And no, I can't help you, I am not USian, just an outside observer. Sadly, due to its weight, whatever USA does, heavily influences everybody else as well.
Which of my statements are you contesting?From my point of view, your stance (play fairly, according to the rules set by your stronger opponent) is delusional. Note that the opponent is not 'republicans', but the whole ruling elites.And no, I can't help you, I am not USian, just an outside observer. Sadly, due to its weight, whatever USA does, heavily influences everybody else as well.
From my point of view, your stance (play fairly, according to the rules set by your stronger opponent) is delusional. Note that the opponent is not 'republicans', but the whole ruling elites.And no, I can't help you, I am not USian, just an outside observer. Sadly, due to its weight, whatever USA does, heavily influences everybody else as well.
And no, I can't help you, I am not USian, just an outside observer. Sadly, due to its weight, whatever USA does, heavily influences everybody else as well.
reply
No, it isn't. Sanders' supporters didn't have the votes. That's a fact.If people believe in something, they should call their electeds and vote. The fact that a lot of people with a certain confluence of views (privacy, anti-war, et cetera) are too lazy to do either (regardless of post rationalization), but not self aware enough to not complain about it, is delusional cynicism.
If people believe in something, they should call their electeds and vote. The fact that a lot of people with a certain confluence of views (privacy, anti-war, et cetera) are too lazy to do either (regardless of post rationalization), but not self aware enough to not complain about it, is delusional cynicism.
reply
I said the leadership of the democratic party did dirty tricks to prevent him winning.The mainstream media was also against him.Not anywhere close to a level playing field.Note, that I am not against voting or calling your elected officials and all the related stuff. That is necessary. But, sadly, far from sufficient. If you think that that is sufficient, you are delusional.Your subsequent generalizations are lazy and unsubstantiated, in fact they fit the classical smear patterns established by the mainstream media.
The mainstream media was also against him.Not anywhere close to a level playing field.Note, that I am not against voting or calling your elected officials and all the related stuff. That is necessary. But, sadly, far from sufficient. If you think that that is sufficient, you are delusional.Your subsequent generalizations are lazy and unsubstantiated, in fact they fit the classical smear patterns established by the mainstream media.
Not anywhere close to a level playing field.Note, that I am not against voting or calling your elected officials and all the related stuff. That is necessary. But, sadly, far from sufficient. If you think that that is sufficient, you are delusional.Your subsequent generalizations are lazy and unsubstantiated, in fact they fit the classical smear patterns established by the mainstream media.
Note, that I am not against voting or calling your elected officials and all the related stuff. That is necessary. But, sadly, far from sufficient. If you think that that is sufficient, you are delusional.Your subsequent generalizations are lazy and unsubstantiated, in fact they fit the classical smear patterns established by the mainstream media.
Your subsequent generalizations are lazy and unsubstantiated, in fact they fit the classical smear patterns established by the mainstream media.
reply
But still, ultimately, turnout was turnout. Media saying mean things about your side isn't a real excuse, Trump has been saying the same for a decade.> they fit the classical smear patterns established by the mainstream mediaOf course they must. In the meantime, the issues I care about seem decently reflected (outside privacy and war, where I concede most Americans who share my views are lazy, delusional and nihilistic). I've even had the opportunity to help write some state and federal legislation. So I guess I should be okay with the lack of political competition.
> they fit the classical smear patterns established by the mainstream mediaOf course they must. In the meantime, the issues I care about seem decently reflected (outside privacy and war, where I concede most Americans who share my views are lazy, delusional and nihilistic). I've even had the opportunity to help write some state and federal legislation. So I guess I should be okay with the lack of political competition.
Of course they must. In the meantime, the issues I care about seem decently reflected (outside privacy and war, where I concede most Americans who share my views are lazy, delusional and nihilistic). I've even had the opportunity to help write some state and federal legislation. So I guess I should be okay with the lack of political competition.
reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Democratic_Party_presiden...Skill issue. Run your candidate. Convince people to vote for them.> How much has the current administration asked the public about going to war with Iran?THE ELECTIONS are how the public weighs in.
Skill issue. Run your candidate. Convince people to vote for them.> How much has the current administration asked the public about going to war with Iran?THE ELECTIONS are how the public weighs in.
> How much has the current administration asked the public about going to war with Iran?THE ELECTIONS are how the public weighs in.
THE ELECTIONS are how the public weighs in.
reply
That's the second box only. There's also the soapbox (that you also referred to), the jury box and ultimately the ammo box.
reply
But you are saying: You lost fair and square, wait 4 years to have any say in what is going on.Re: THE ELECTIONS are how the public weighs in.When the choice is between Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the public's choice is meaningless.To say nothing about politicians outright shamelessly lying (e.g. Trump campaigning on 'no more wars').
Re: THE ELECTIONS are how the public weighs in.When the choice is between Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the public's choice is meaningless.To say nothing about politicians outright shamelessly lying (e.g. Trump campaigning on 'no more wars').
When the choice is between Tweedledee and Tweedledum, the public's choice is meaningless.To say nothing about politicians outright shamelessly lying (e.g. Trump campaigning on 'no more wars').
To say nothing about politicians outright shamelessly lying (e.g. Trump campaigning on 'no more wars').
reply
(Also, political donors are unusually engaged upper-middle-class people which means they are left of the average voter.)
reply
Sorry I didn't invent the idea that there are federal elections every two years, I'm just telling you that you have to win them. Bonus points: this is also how you can change the election schedule or political system!If you're saying both candidates were bad when one was Trump, and the other was Hillary, Kamala, or Joe, then you don't have very good judgement. I agree Trump lying about not starting a war was bad. Many of us have said for years that he is a terrible liar. Please help us.
If you're saying both candidates were bad when one was Trump, and the other was Hillary, Kamala, or Joe, then you don't have very good judgement. I agree Trump lying about not starting a war was bad. Many of us have said for years that he is a terrible liar. Please help us.
reply
Trump is monstrously bad (= force the shit hitting the fan NOW), the democratic alternatives were just 'normally' bad (= continue the same old crap driving the shit closer to the fan, ignoring the looming disaster).
reply
Uh, yeah? I voted for Biden/Harris.And in any case, focusing almost exclusively on one race is part of the problem. Where I live, we also had a Dem primary for the house district, and a more electable candidate won - and then went on to win in the general. It was one of the very few red->blue flips in 2024.Our former congresswoman, incidentally:https://newrepublic.com/post/207234/trump-labor-secretary-ch...Then there are all the races for school boards, city council, county commission and all those things that provide the base and the bench to build off of.
And in any case, focusing almost exclusively on one race is part of the problem. Where I live, we also had a Dem primary for the house district, and a more electable candidate won - and then went on to win in the general. It was one of the very few red->blue flips in 2024.Our former congresswoman, incidentally:https://newrepublic.com/post/207234/trump-labor-secretary-ch...Then there are all the races for school boards, city council, county commission and all those things that provide the base and the bench to build off of.
Our former congresswoman, incidentally:https://newrepublic.com/post/207234/trump-labor-secretary-ch...Then there are all the races for school boards, city council, county commission and all those things that provide the base and the bench to build off of.
https://newrepublic.com/post/207234/trump-labor-secretary-ch...Then there are all the races for school boards, city council, county commission and all those things that provide the base and the bench to build off of.
Then there are all the races for school boards, city council, county commission and all those things that provide the base and the bench to build off of.
reply
reply
... But the government flooding cities with thousands of masked thugs with a license to do whatever they want... has so far been an entirely Republican thing.There are more colours to the world than pure black and pure white. There are also a million shades of grey in between, and most of us have the ability to distinguish between them.
There are more colours to the world than pure black and pure white. There are also a million shades of grey in between, and most of us have the ability to distinguish between them.
reply
https://usa.gov/renounce-lose-citizenship
reply
reply
If you have so little faith in them that they won't honour the privacy controls you should also delete your non-consumer account too.
reply
reply
“Oppenheimer was clearly an enormously charming man, but also a manipulative man and one who made enemies he need not have made. The really horrible things Oppenheimer did as a young man – placing a poisoned apple on the desk of his advisor at Cambridge, attempting to strangle his best friend – and yes, he really did those things – Monk passes off as the result of temporary insanity, a profound but passing psychological disturbance. (There's no real attempt by Monk to explain Oppenheimer's attempt to get Linus Pauling's wife Ava to run off to Mexico with him, which ended the possibility of collaboration with one of the greatest scientists of the twentieth, or any, century.) Certainly the youthful Oppenheimer did go through a period of serious mental illness; but the desire to get his own way, and feelings of enormous frustration with people who prevented him from getting his own way, seem to have been part of his character throughout his life.”Seems more like Sam Altman, who is known to get his way, than Dario.
Seems more like Sam Altman, who is known to get his way, than Dario.
reply
When combined with a somewhat paradoxical large ego and occasionally fanciful reshaping of his own life story or exaggeration, it's entirely plausible (if not likely) that this was in reality a brief intrusive thought or a partially realized fantasy blown up into a catchy anecdote that better fit his self-image of being unable to control his typically human qualities of anger and envy.If it was Sam Altman, we'd have heard the story from the guy he tried to poison, who instead of filing a police report thought it showed Sam was a real go-getter and offered him his first job on the spot as VP at the company he founded (later forced out by Sam replacing him as CEO, but still considers him a friend with no hard feelings).
If it was Sam Altman, we'd have heard the story from the guy he tried to poison, who instead of filing a police report thought it showed Sam was a real go-getter and offered him his first job on the spot as VP at the company he founded (later forced out by Sam replacing him as CEO, but still considers him a friend with no hard feelings).
reply
As you suggest, it is easy to imagine Altman in the same hot seat. Never mind his sexual orientation, which the Republican theocrats will eventually use against him as surely as the knives came out for Ernst Röhm.
reply
There were people working in government who successfully attacked Oppenheimer for personal and/or policy reasons, people who stood by, and people who unsuccessfully supported him, voted to clear him, or condemned the proceedings.Oppenheimer still paid the price, and arguably, the risks to someone like him today are considerably higher, as the current administration isn't exactly like Eisnehower's.Nevertheless it's reductionist, reifying sentimentality to talk about "the government" turning "viciously" on someone who "served them well" because they are defying its agenda. The government isn't a character in Game of Thrones. The responsibility lies with the specific individuals who attacked him, and those who stood by.
Oppenheimer still paid the price, and arguably, the risks to someone like him today are considerably higher, as the current administration isn't exactly like Eisnehower's.Nevertheless it's reductionist, reifying sentimentality to talk about "the government" turning "viciously" on someone who "served them well" because they are defying its agenda. The government isn't a character in Game of Thrones. The responsibility lies with the specific individuals who attacked him, and those who stood by.
Nevertheless it's reductionist, reifying sentimentality to talk about "the government" turning "viciously" on someone who "served them well" because they are defying its agenda. The government isn't a character in Game of Thrones. The responsibility lies with the specific individuals who attacked him, and those who stood by.
reply
I'm sure that was of great comfort to Oppenheimer, as it will be to Altman and/or Amodei. "It's not you, it's us."
reply
1. Some other AI company would cut a deal with the Pentagon. There's no world in which all the labs boycott the Pentagon. So who? Choosing Grok would be bad for the US, which is a bad outcome, but Amodei would have discounted that option, because he knows that despite their moral failures, the Pentagon is not stupid and Grok sucks.That leaves Gemini or OpenAI, and I bet they predicted it would be OpenAI. Choosing OpenAI does not harm the republic - say what you will about Altman, ChatGPT is not toxic and it is capable - but it does have the potential to harm OpenAI, which is my second point:2. OpenAI may benefit from this in the short term, and Anthropic may likewise be harmed in the short term, but what about the long game? Here, the strategic benefits to Anthropic in both distancing themselves from the Trump administration and letting OpenAI sully themselves with this association are readily apparent. This is true from a talent retention and attraction standpoint and especially true from a marketing standpoint. Claude has long had much less market share than ChatGPT. In that position, there are plenty of strategic reasons to take a moral/ethical stand like this.What I did not expect, and I would guess Amodei did not either, is that Claude would now be #1 in the app store. The benefits from this stance look to be materializing much more quickly than anyone in favour of his courage might have hoped.
That leaves Gemini or OpenAI, and I bet they predicted it would be OpenAI. Choosing OpenAI does not harm the republic - say what you will about Altman, ChatGPT is not toxic and it is capable - but it does have the potential to harm OpenAI, which is my second point:2. OpenAI may benefit from this in the short term, and Anthropic may likewise be harmed in the short term, but what about the long game? Here, the strategic benefits to Anthropic in both distancing themselves from the Trump administration and letting OpenAI sully themselves with this association are readily apparent. This is true from a talent retention and attraction standpoint and especially true from a marketing standpoint. Claude has long had much less market share than ChatGPT. In that position, there are plenty of strategic reasons to take a moral/ethical stand like this.What I did not expect, and I would guess Amodei did not either, is that Claude would now be #1 in the app store. The benefits from this stance look to be materializing much more quickly than anyone in favour of his courage might have hoped.
2. OpenAI may benefit from this in the short term, and Anthropic may likewise be harmed in the short term, but what about the long game? Here, the strategic benefits to Anthropic in both distancing themselves from the Trump administration and letting OpenAI sully themselves with this association are readily apparent. This is true from a talent retention and attraction standpoint and especially true from a marketing standpoint. Claude has long had much less market share than ChatGPT. In that position, there are plenty of strategic reasons to take a moral/ethical stand like this.What I did not expect, and I would guess Amodei did not either, is that Claude would now be #1 in the app store. The benefits from this stance look to be materializing much more quickly than anyone in favour of his courage might have hoped.
What I did not expect, and I would guess Amodei did not either, is that Claude would now be #1 in the app store. The benefits from this stance look to be materializing much more quickly than anyone in favour of his courage might have hoped.
reply
They chose Grok and OpenAI. The story was drowned out by the Anthropic controversy, but an xAI deal was signed the same week.
reply
reply
Not adding up
reply
reply
reply
Wikileaks and Assange got popular too. What happened to them?The State Dept and CIA do exactly what Assange did. They pick and choose who to target with leaks. They get away with it (mostly even when exposed) because they officially are in power. Assange was not in power.
If you take a moral position do it when you have real power.
The State Dept and CIA do exactly what Assange did. They pick and choose who to target with leaks. They get away with it (mostly even when exposed) because they officially are in power. Assange was not in power.
If you take a moral position do it when you have real power.
reply
If the condition for getting real power is having no morals, this is hard to accomplish.
reply
reply
if we consider AIs as "force multipliers" as we do with coding agents, it's easy to see how any AI company can harm the republic if the government they are serving is unethical and amoral.
reply
3. Talent migration to Anthropic. No serious researcher working towards AGI will want it to be in the hands of OpenAI anymore. They are all asking themselves: "do I trust Sam or Dario more with AGI/ASI?" and are finding the former lacking.It is already telling that Anthropic's models outperform OAI's with half the headcount and a fraction of the funding.
It is already telling that Anthropic's models outperform OAI's with half the headcount and a fraction of the funding.
reply
reply
reply
reply
App Store rankings are meaningless, I have Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini all in top five, with a electronic mail app being 1 and a postal tracking service app (for a very small provider) being 3.
reply
reply
reply
If US & A really goes full-Huawei on Anthropic, they can't IPO. It's an existential crisis for them. I think they can survive in some form, somehow, because their model is really good, probably the best.And in other times, I would think the US government had sufficient intellectual horsepower to not cut off its own dick, and the golden goose's head, over some idiotic morning-drinker road-rage type beef. But these are not other times. These are these times.
And in other times, I would think the US government had sufficient intellectual horsepower to not cut off its own dick, and the golden goose's head, over some idiotic morning-drinker road-rage type beef. But these are not other times. These are these times.
reply
Also maybe not seeing the message or connection here... That myth isn't really about who has power or not, right? It's kind of just a trite little "why you should do good even when no one is watching" thing. It just serves Socrates for his argument with Thrasymachus, and leads us into book 2 where it really gets going with Glaucon and all that. This is from memory so I might be a little off.
reply
The story is asking whats the source of morality? Who decides where the lines are? And its not scientists. Science produces the Ring.
reply
> According to the tradition, Gyges was a shepherd in the service of the king of Lydia; there was a great storm, and an earthquake made an opening in the earth at the place where he was feeding his flock. Amazed at the sight, he descended into the opening, where, among other marvels, he beheld a hollow brazen horse, having doors, at which he stooping and looking in saw a dead body of stature, as appeared to him, more than human, and having nothing on but a gold ring; this he took from the finger of the dead and reascended. Now the shepherds met together, according to custom, that they might send their monthly report about the flocks to the king; into their assembly he came having the ring on his finger, and as he was sitting among them he chanced to turn the collet of the ring inside his hand, when instantly he became invisible to the rest of the company and they began to speak of him as if he were no longer present. He was astonished at this, and again touching the ring he turned the collet outwards and reappeared; he made several trials of the ring, and always with the same result—when he turned the collet inwards he became invisible, when outwards he reappeared. Whereupon he contrived to be chosen one of the messengers who were sent to the court; whereas soon as he arrived he seduced the queen, and with her help conspired against the king and slew him, and took the kingdom. Suppose now that there were two such magic rings, and the just put on one of them and the unjust the other; no man can be imagined to be of such an iron nature that he would stand fast in justice. No man would keep his hands off what was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out of the market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure, or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respects be like a God among men. Then the actions of the just would be as the actions of the unjust; they would both come at last to the same point. And this we may truly affirm to be a great proof that a man is just, not willingly or because he thinks that justice is any good to him individually, but of necessity, for wherever any one thinks that he can safely be unjust, there he is unjust.https://gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1497/pg1497.txt
https://gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1497/pg1497.txt
reply
But besides Sam Altman, this whole episode has made me totally and completely lose all respect for Paul Graham. I used to really idolize pg, and I really used to like his essays, but over the years I've found his essays increasingly displayed a disturbing lack of introspection, like they'd always seem to say that starting a startup is the best thing anyone can do, and if you're not good at startups then you kind of suck.But his continued support of Altman in this instance (see https://x.com/paulg/status/2027908286146875591, and the comment in that thread where he replies "yes") is just so extra disappointing and baffling. First, his big commendation for Altman is that he's doing an AMA? Give me an f'ing break. When someone is a great spin doctor I'm not going to commend them for doing more spinning. It's like he has total blinders on and is unwilling to see how sama's actions in this instance are so disgusting and duplicitous. Maybe subconsciously he knows he's responsible for really launching sama into the public consciousness, so he now just is incapable of seeing the undeniably shitty things sama has done.Oh well, I guess it's just another tech leader from the late 90s/early 00s who has just shown me he's kind of a shitty person like a lot of us.
But his continued support of Altman in this instance (see https://x.com/paulg/status/2027908286146875591, and the comment in that thread where he replies "yes") is just so extra disappointing and baffling. First, his big commendation for Altman is that he's doing an AMA? Give me an f'ing break. When someone is a great spin doctor I'm not going to commend them for doing more spinning. It's like he has total blinders on and is unwilling to see how sama's actions in this instance are so disgusting and duplicitous. Maybe subconsciously he knows he's responsible for really launching sama into the public consciousness, so he now just is incapable of seeing the undeniably shitty things sama has done.Oh well, I guess it's just another tech leader from the late 90s/early 00s who has just shown me he's kind of a shitty person like a lot of us.
Oh well, I guess it's just another tech leader from the late 90s/early 00s who has just shown me he's kind of a shitty person like a lot of us.
reply
reply
reply
reply
> However, only an act of Congress can legally and formally change the department's name and secretary's title, so "Department of Defense" and "secretary of defense" remain legally official.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_De...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_De...
reply
Verification requires access to classified logs. These logs would attract the spies of the whole world. Even if these logs are in principle for "past actions", in practice past logs (for war games, for example) would compromise future strategy.Since these manual audits are too risky, the only alternative is to hard-code limits into the AI. But are we ready trust an AI to "judge" a mission and refuse to execute during a crisis?Anthropic wanted technical enforcement, the Pentagon wanted trust.It's a choice between two bad options: an unaccountable military and an unreliable AI kill switch. They are both very dangerous, just in different ways.
Since these manual audits are too risky, the only alternative is to hard-code limits into the AI. But are we ready trust an AI to "judge" a mission and refuse to execute during a crisis?Anthropic wanted technical enforcement, the Pentagon wanted trust.It's a choice between two bad options: an unaccountable military and an unreliable AI kill switch. They are both very dangerous, just in different ways.
Anthropic wanted technical enforcement, the Pentagon wanted trust.It's a choice between two bad options: an unaccountable military and an unreliable AI kill switch. They are both very dangerous, just in different ways.
It's a choice between two bad options: an unaccountable military and an unreliable AI kill switch. They are both very dangerous, just in different ways.
reply
This is my first thought as well. It's too obvious. He should have consulted ChatGPT before the announcement.
reply
reply
Secret FISA court decisions will say the use is lawful, but you'll never get to read or challenge those decisions.
reply
Just good 'ol fashion grifting mixed with a bit of government corruption.This country has been boiling the frog of graft, grifting, and corruption too long.
This country has been boiling the frog of graft, grifting, and corruption too long.
reply
reply
I believe this understanding is correct. The issue many people have these days with Dept. of War, and most of Trump admin is that they have little respect for laws. They only follow the ones they like and openly ignore the ones that are inconvenient.Dept of "War" should have zero problems agreeing to the two conditions Anthropic outlined, if they were honest brokers. But I think most of us know that they are not. Calling them dishonest brokers seems very charitable.
Dept of "War" should have zero problems agreeing to the two conditions Anthropic outlined, if they were honest brokers. But I think most of us know that they are not. Calling them dishonest brokers seems very charitable.
reply
reply
reply
I recommend reading Yuval Noah Harari's Nexus for a deep discussion around this.He makes the point that what makes this AI age much more dangerous for mass surveillance isn't just the collection of data, which has indeed been possible for a while, but the new ability to have AI sift through that enormous volume of information, an ability which until recently has not been possible in a meaningful way without a ton of manual work to support it.Older attempts at mass control of a population already involved mass surveillance, even in a large amount of detail, but even when capturing in detail all citizens' activities, there were just not enough people around to be able to dig through that and analyze it. This has been somewhat true even with the help of computers, though computers have certainly already been making this easier.But now you can just give all that data to an AI with your instructions, and it'll apply some sort of "judgement" on your behalf, completely autonomously, and even perform actions against those folks it finds, again autonomously, without needing to manually build a whole infrastructure to do that with manual rules. That's a very meaningful upgrade for someone wanting to control a population.
He makes the point that what makes this AI age much more dangerous for mass surveillance isn't just the collection of data, which has indeed been possible for a while, but the new ability to have AI sift through that enormous volume of information, an ability which until recently has not been possible in a meaningful way without a ton of manual work to support it.Older attempts at mass control of a population already involved mass surveillance, even in a large amount of detail, but even when capturing in detail all citizens' activities, there were just not enough people around to be able to dig through that and analyze it. This has been somewhat true even with the help of computers, though computers have certainly already been making this easier.But now you can just give all that data to an AI with your instructions, and it'll apply some sort of "judgement" on your behalf, completely autonomously, and even perform actions against those folks it finds, again autonomously, without needing to manually build a whole infrastructure to do that with manual rules. That's a very meaningful upgrade for someone wanting to control a population.
Older attempts at mass control of a population already involved mass surveillance, even in a large amount of detail, but even when capturing in detail all citizens' activities, there were just not enough people around to be able to dig through that and analyze it. This has been somewhat true even with the help of computers, though computers have certainly already been making this easier.But now you can just give all that data to an AI with your instructions, and it'll apply some sort of "judgement" on your behalf, completely autonomously, and even perform actions against those folks it finds, again autonomously, without needing to manually build a whole infrastructure to do that with manual rules. That's a very meaningful upgrade for someone wanting to control a population.
But now you can just give all that data to an AI with your instructions, and it'll apply some sort of "judgement" on your behalf, completely autonomously, and even perform actions against those folks it finds, again autonomously, without needing to manually build a whole infrastructure to do that with manual rules. That's a very meaningful upgrade for someone wanting to control a population.
reply
reply
like saying kids having internet-connected devices with built-in cameras doesn't increase the probability of sexting, they could do the same with film cameras and a fax machine
reply
reply
reply
reply
Ex: For the above statement, if they're truly dishonest brokers and openly ignore the rules that are inconvenient, they would have zero problems agreeing to Anthropic's terms and then violating them. So what you say may be quite true, but there would still need to be more to the story for it to make sense.Ex: DoW officials are stating that they were shocked that their vendor checked in on whether signed contractual safety terms were violated: They require a vendor who won't do such a check. But that opens up other confusing oversight questions, eg, instead of a backchannel check, would they have preferred straight to the IG? Or the IG more aggressively checking these things unasked so vendors don't? It's hard to imagine such an important and publicly visible negotiation being driven by internal regulatory politicking.I wonder if there's a straighter line for all these things. Irrespective of whether folks like or dislike the administration, they love hardball negotiations and to make money. So as with most things in business and government, follow the money...
Ex: DoW officials are stating that they were shocked that their vendor checked in on whether signed contractual safety terms were violated: They require a vendor who won't do such a check. But that opens up other confusing oversight questions, eg, instead of a backchannel check, would they have preferred straight to the IG? Or the IG more aggressively checking these things unasked so vendors don't? It's hard to imagine such an important and publicly visible negotiation being driven by internal regulatory politicking.I wonder if there's a straighter line for all these things. Irrespective of whether folks like or dislike the administration, they love hardball negotiations and to make money. So as with most things in business and government, follow the money...
I wonder if there's a straighter line for all these things. Irrespective of whether folks like or dislike the administration, they love hardball negotiations and to make money. So as with most things in business and government, follow the money...
reply
"Find all of the terrorists in this photo", "Which targets should I bomb first?"Even if the DoD wanted to ignore the legal terms, the model itself would not cooperate. DoD required a specially trained product without limitations.
Even if the DoD wanted to ignore the legal terms, the model itself would not cooperate. DoD required a specially trained product without limitations.
reply
reply
At the same time, it is expressly illegal in some circumstances; that was the whole core of the Snowden revelations. The NSA and CIA are expressly curtailed from doing that by law — there are cases where they may surveil citizens with a court order, but not "mass" surveillance. There are some restrictions on the military along those same lines.Keywords: Executive Order 12333, FISA, National Security Act, Posse Comitatus Act
Keywords: Executive Order 12333, FISA, National Security Act, Posse Comitatus Act
reply
If your company makes an herbicide that happens to be very good at killing off anyone who drinks it at a high concentration in their water supply, you're saying that there should be no way for your company to resist being used for mass murder (including unavoidable collateral damage)?Also, the core mission of the military is not "killing its adversaries through any means necessary". It is to defend state interests. Some people have a belief that mass killing is the best mechanism for accomplishing that. I do not agree with, nor do I want to associate with, those people. They are morally and objectively wrong. Yes, sometimes killing people is the most effective -- or more likely, the quickest -- way. In practice, it doesn't work very well. The threat of violence is much more powerful than actually committing violence. If you have to resort to the latter, you've usually screwed up and lost the chance to achieve the optimal outcome. It is true that having no restrictions whatsoever on your ability to commit violence is going to be more intimidating, but it also means that you have to maintain that threat constantly for everyone, because nobody has any other reason to give you what you want.The actual military is not evil. Your conception of it is.
Also, the core mission of the military is not "killing its adversaries through any means necessary". It is to defend state interests. Some people have a belief that mass killing is the best mechanism for accomplishing that. I do not agree with, nor do I want to associate with, those people. They are morally and objectively wrong. Yes, sometimes killing people is the most effective -- or more likely, the quickest -- way. In practice, it doesn't work very well. The threat of violence is much more powerful than actually committing violence. If you have to resort to the latter, you've usually screwed up and lost the chance to achieve the optimal outcome. It is true that having no restrictions whatsoever on your ability to commit violence is going to be more intimidating, but it also means that you have to maintain that threat constantly for everyone, because nobody has any other reason to give you what you want.The actual military is not evil. Your conception of it is.
The actual military is not evil. Your conception of it is.
reply
> The actual military is not evil. Your conception of it is.You're right, but there's a a real question here: should a company have the ability to control or veto the decisions of the democratically-elected government?To give different hypothetical example: should Microsoft be allowed to put terms in its Windows contracts with the government, stipulating that Windows cannot be used to create or enforce certain tax policy or regulations that Microsoft disagrees with? Windows is all over, and I'm sure pretty much every government process touches Windows at some point, so such a term would have a lot of power.
You're right, but there's a a real question here: should a company have the ability to control or veto the decisions of the democratically-elected government?To give different hypothetical example: should Microsoft be allowed to put terms in its Windows contracts with the government, stipulating that Windows cannot be used to create or enforce certain tax policy or regulations that Microsoft disagrees with? Windows is all over, and I'm sure pretty much every government process touches Windows at some point, so such a term would have a lot of power.
To give different hypothetical example: should Microsoft be allowed to put terms in its Windows contracts with the government, stipulating that Windows cannot be used to create or enforce certain tax policy or regulations that Microsoft disagrees with? Windows is all over, and I'm sure pretty much every government process touches Windows at some point, so such a term would have a lot of power.
reply
I don't think "control or veto" is fair. Anthropic is not trying to prevent the US government from creating full autonomous killbots based on inadequate technology. They are only using contract law to prevent their own stuff from being used in that way.But that aside, my opinion is that to a first order approximation, yes a company should very much be able to have say in its contract negotiations with any party including the government. It's very similar to the draft. I don't believe a draft is ethical until the situation is extreme, and there ought to be tight controls on what it takes to declare the situation to be that extreme. At any other time, nobody should be forced to join the military and shoot people, and corporations (that are made of people) should not be forced to have their product used for shooting people.A corporation is a legal fiction to describe a group of people. Some restrictions can be placed on corporations in exchange for the benefits that come from that legal fiction, but nothing that overrides the rights of its constituent people.Governments are made of people too. Again, a subset of people are given some powers in order to better achieve the will of the people, but with tight controls on those powers to keep the divergence to a minimum. (Of course, people will always find the cracks and loopholes and break out of their constraints, but I'm talking about design not real-world implementation here.)So to look at your hypothetical, first I'd say it's not very different from the question of whether an individual person should be forced to personally enforce tax policy. Normally, I'd say no. There are many situations where the government needs more say and authority in such things, but that must only be achieved via representatives of the people passing laws to allow such authority. Other than that, yes: I believe a company should be able to negotiate whatever contract terms it wants. In a democracy, we are not subjects of a controlling government; the government is an extension of us.In practical terms, if Microsoft were to insist on that contract stipulation, the government would not agree to the contract and would award its business to someone else. If the government were especially out of control and/or unethical, it might punish Microsoft with regulations or declarations of supply chain risk or whatever, but that is clearly overstepping its bounds and ought to be considered illegal if it isn't already. The usual fallback would be that the people would throw the people perpetrating that out on their asses. That's the "democratically-elected part".Obviously, Microsoft would be stupid to insist on such a thing in their contract, and its employees would probably lose all confidence in the corporate leadership. Most likely, they'd leave and start Muckrosaft next door that rapidly develops a similar product and sells it to the government under a reasonable contract.Basically, I'm always going to start from people first, and use organizations and laws only in order to achieve the will of the people. The fact that the people are stupid does make that harder, but the whole point of democracy is that we'll work out the right balance over time.
But that aside, my opinion is that to a first order approximation, yes a company should very much be able to have say in its contract negotiations with any party including the government. It's very similar to the draft. I don't believe a draft is ethical until the situation is extreme, and there ought to be tight controls on what it takes to declare the situation to be that extreme. At any other time, nobody should be forced to join the military and shoot people, and corporations (that are made of people) should not be forced to have their product used for shooting people.A corporation is a legal fiction to describe a group of people. Some restrictions can be placed on corporations in exchange for the benefits that come from that legal fiction, but nothing that overrides the rights of its constituent people.Governments are made of people too. Again, a subset of people are given some powers in order to better achieve the will of the people, but with tight controls on those powers to keep the divergence to a minimum. (Of course, people will always find the cracks and loopholes and break out of their constraints, but I'm talking about design not real-world implementation here.)So to look at your hypothetical, first I'd say it's not very different from the question of whether an individual person should be forced to personally enforce tax policy. Normally, I'd say no. There are many situations where the government needs more say and authority in such things, but that must only be achieved via representatives of the people passing laws to allow such authority. Other than that, yes: I believe a company should be able to negotiate whatever contract terms it wants. In a democracy, we are not subjects of a controlling government; the government is an extension of us.In practical terms, if Microsoft were to insist on that contract stipulation, the government would not agree to the contract and would award its business to someone else. If the government were especially out of control and/or unethical, it might punish Microsoft with regulations or declarations of supply chain risk or whatever, but that is clearly overstepping its bounds and ought to be considered illegal if it isn't already. The usual fallback would be that the people would throw the people perpetrating that out on their asses. That's the "democratically-elected part".Obviously, Microsoft would be stupid to insist on such a thing in their contract, and its employees would probably lose all confidence in the corporate leadership. Most likely, they'd leave and start Muckrosaft next door that rapidly develops a similar product and sells it to the government under a reasonable contract.Basically, I'm always going to start from people first, and use organizations and laws only in order to achieve the will of the people. The fact that the people are stupid does make that harder, but the whole point of democracy is that we'll work out the right balance over time.
A corporation is a legal fiction to describe a group of people. Some restrictions can be placed on corporations in exchange for the benefits that come from that legal fiction, but nothing that overrides the rights of its constituent people.Governments are made of people too. Again, a subset of people are given some powers in order to better achieve the will of the people, but with tight controls on those powers to keep the divergence to a minimum. (Of course, people will always find the cracks and loopholes and break out of their constraints, but I'm talking about design not real-world implementation here.)So to look at your hypothetical, first I'd say it's not very different from the question of whether an individual person should be forced to personally enforce tax policy. Normally, I'd say no. There are many situations where the government needs more say and authority in such things, but that must only be achieved via representatives of the people passing laws to allow such authority. Other than that, yes: I believe a company should be able to negotiate whatever contract terms it wants. In a democracy, we are not subjects of a controlling government; the government is an extension of us.In practical terms, if Microsoft were to insist on that contract stipulation, the government would not agree to the contract and would award its business to someone else. If the government were especially out of control and/or unethical, it might punish Microsoft with regulations or declarations of supply chain risk or whatever, but that is clearly overstepping its bounds and ought to be considered illegal if it isn't already. The usual fallback would be that the people would throw the people perpetrating that out on their asses. That's the "democratically-elected part".Obviously, Microsoft would be stupid to insist on such a thing in their contract, and its employees would probably lose all confidence in the corporate leadership. Most likely, they'd leave and start Muckrosaft next door that rapidly develops a similar product and sells it to the government under a reasonable contract.Basically, I'm always going to start from people first, and use organizations and laws only in order to achieve the will of the people. The fact that the people are stupid does make that harder, but the whole point of democracy is that we'll work out the right balance over time.
Governments are made of people too. Again, a subset of people are given some powers in order to better achieve the will of the people, but with tight controls on those powers to keep the divergence to a minimum. (Of course, people will always find the cracks and loopholes and break out of their constraints, but I'm talking about design not real-world implementation here.)So to look at your hypothetical, first I'd say it's not very different from the question of whether an individual person should be forced to personally enforce tax policy. Normally, I'd say no. There are many situations where the government needs more say and authority in such things, but that must only be achieved via representatives of the people passing laws to allow such authority. Other than that, yes: I believe a company should be able to negotiate whatever contract terms it wants. In a democracy, we are not subjects of a controlling government; the government is an extension of us.In practical terms, if Microsoft were to insist on that contract stipulation, the government would not agree to the contract and would award its business to someone else. If the government were especially out of control and/or unethical, it might punish Microsoft with regulations or declarations of supply chain risk or whatever, but that is clearly overstepping its bounds and ought to be considered illegal if it isn't already. The usual fallback would be that the people would throw the people perpetrating that out on their asses. That's the "democratically-elected part".Obviously, Microsoft would be stupid to insist on such a thing in their contract, and its employees would probably lose all confidence in the corporate leadership. Most likely, they'd leave and start Muckrosaft next door that rapidly develops a similar product and sells it to the government under a reasonable contract.Basically, I'm always going to start from people first, and use organizations and laws only in order to achieve the will of the people. The fact that the people are stupid does make that harder, but the whole point of democracy is that we'll work out the right balance over time.
So to look at your hypothetical, first I'd say it's not very different from the question of whether an individual person should be forced to personally enforce tax policy. Normally, I'd say no. There are many situations where the government needs more say and authority in such things, but that must only be achieved via representatives of the people passing laws to allow such authority. Other than that, yes: I believe a company should be able to negotiate whatever contract terms it wants. In a democracy, we are not subjects of a controlling government; the government is an extension of us.In practical terms, if Microsoft were to insist on that contract stipulation, the government would not agree to the contract and would award its business to someone else. If the government were especially out of control and/or unethical, it might punish Microsoft with regulations or declarations of supply chain risk or whatever, but that is clearly overstepping its bounds and ought to be considered illegal if it isn't already. The usual fallback would be that the people would throw the people perpetrating that out on their asses. That's the "democratically-elected part".Obviously, Microsoft would be stupid to insist on such a thing in their contract, and its employees would probably lose all confidence in the corporate leadership. Most likely, they'd leave and start Muckrosaft next door that rapidly develops a similar product and sells it to the government under a reasonable contract.Basically, I'm always going to start from people first, and use organizations and laws only in order to achieve the will of the people. The fact that the people are stupid does make that harder, but the whole point of democracy is that we'll work out the right balance over time.
In practical terms, if Microsoft were to insist on that contract stipulation, the government would not agree to the contract and would award its business to someone else. If the government were especially out of control and/or unethical, it might punish Microsoft with regulations or declarations of supply chain risk or whatever, but that is clearly overstepping its bounds and ought to be considered illegal if it isn't already. The usual fallback would be that the people would throw the people perpetrating that out on their asses. That's the "democratically-elected part".Obviously, Microsoft would be stupid to insist on such a thing in their contract, and its employees would probably lose all confidence in the corporate leadership. Most likely, they'd leave and start Muckrosaft next door that rapidly develops a similar product and sells it to the government under a reasonable contract.Basically, I'm always going to start from people first, and use organizations and laws only in order to achieve the will of the people. The fact that the people are stupid does make that harder, but the whole point of democracy is that we'll work out the right balance over time.
Obviously, Microsoft would be stupid to insist on such a thing in their contract, and its employees would probably lose all confidence in the corporate leadership. Most likely, they'd leave and start Muckrosaft next door that rapidly develops a similar product and sells it to the government under a reasonable contract.Basically, I'm always going to start from people first, and use organizations and laws only in order to achieve the will of the people. The fact that the people are stupid does make that harder, but the whole point of democracy is that we'll work out the right balance over time.
Basically, I'm always going to start from people first, and use organizations and laws only in order to achieve the will of the people. The fact that the people are stupid does make that harder, but the whole point of democracy is that we'll work out the right balance over time.
reply
> The threat of violence is much more powerful than actually committing violence.While I agree with this statement, the only way the threat works is if from time to time you apply violence to reinforce your capability and availability to actually do it. And the US is really good at actually being violent so others don't even think about doing something against it, at least the majority of countries anyway.
While I agree with this statement, the only way the threat works is if from time to time you apply violence to reinforce your capability and availability to actually do it. And the US is really good at actually being violent so others don't even think about doing something against it, at least the majority of countries anyway.
reply
Now apply the same logic to the current Iran war.
reply
Al Jazeera has some very good insights into this, and the gist of it is: the Iranian regime is in a fight for its life with nothing to lose. If they are degraded enough, a revolution will start in Iran and they will be killed by the people. Or by US/IL bombs - whichever comes first. There is no way they get out of this alive. They are trying to prolong the inevitable.
reply
You are describing Libya scenario, not a 'lived prosperously ever after'. There is no credible opposition in Iran to take the mantle.
reply
It does not an established opposition because the current regime has the habit of killing anyone it doesn't like or goes against the official line. Now there is a chance for opposition to form.
reply
With the US & Israel supporting the minorities (most likely offering them independence), in the hope of toppling the regime, and bombing mostly Persians, the most likely outcome (assuming they are actually able to force regime change, which is far from guaranteed) is fragmentation and general lawlessness.Note that whoever inherits the regime would have to deal with wholesale destruction of the country, traumatized population and hate for those who bombed them and killed their relatives and children. Slavishly obeying the new foreign overlords will not be very popular. Have we not learned anything from Iraq and Afghanistan? How can you still believe the fairy tales of welcoming the liberators?
Note that whoever inherits the regime would have to deal with wholesale destruction of the country, traumatized population and hate for those who bombed them and killed their relatives and children. Slavishly obeying the new foreign overlords will not be very popular. Have we not learned anything from Iraq and Afghanistan? How can you still believe the fairy tales of welcoming the liberators?
reply
The wars are already total for the weaker sides. See Ukraine/Iran.
Did not stop the stronger side attacking.You are advocating for no constraints (total war) on the stronger side. Taken literally, that means genocide of the losers. Really, that's what you want?But yes, you are right, the world would be much simpler in such case - there will be no humans left. OK, maybe some hunter-gatherers.
You are advocating for no constraints (total war) on the stronger side. Taken literally, that means genocide of the losers. Really, that's what you want?But yes, you are right, the world would be much simpler in such case - there will be no humans left. OK, maybe some hunter-gatherers.
But yes, you are right, the world would be much simpler in such case - there will be no humans left. OK, maybe some hunter-gatherers.
reply
Taken literally, it means genocide of the losers is an option the winning side has. It always has been.Note that Genghis Khan's explicit plan when he conquered China was to wipe out the Chinese to make room for Mongols. He wasn't stopped from doing that; there was no constraint to block him.But he was persuaded not to.
Note that Genghis Khan's explicit plan when he conquered China was to wipe out the Chinese to make room for Mongols. He wasn't stopped from doing that; there was no constraint to block him.But he was persuaded not to.
But he was persuaded not to.
reply
Whenever we say "the regime is hated by it's people it will collapse" it should be asked "then why didn't it collapse already?". In Iran metropolitan areas are where you see opposition. That's also where people have cameras and media orgs tend to be. We get a warped depiction of opposition in Iran even without our own media's baggage. Meanwhile the power base of Iran is everywhere but metropolitan cities. And there's a lot of clients who benefit from the regime. I think this might be worse than the sectarian violence that came out of the Hussein regimes collapse because the Sunni sect his base was built around was still a minority. This time it's the majority and the people being fought against are the Americans, the Israelis and the Arabs so their backs are against the wall this is a total war already from their side.
reply
reply
reply
If I say, no, then am I stopping the military?I feel like it is reasonable that I can say "no, I don't want to sell you my apples."I cannot for the life of me figure out why that means I am stopping the military from killing people. The US Military will definitely still be able to kill people for centuries. I'm just saying I don't want to participate in it.
I feel like it is reasonable that I can say "no, I don't want to sell you my apples."I cannot for the life of me figure out why that means I am stopping the military from killing people. The US Military will definitely still be able to kill people for centuries. I'm just saying I don't want to participate in it.
I cannot for the life of me figure out why that means I am stopping the military from killing people. The US Military will definitely still be able to kill people for centuries. I'm just saying I don't want to participate in it.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
So in short it doesn't matter what the Pentagon thinks as Trump is the commander in chief and as far as I know the Pentagon has to follow his orders.
reply
Evidence (the Commander in Chief calling the opposition terrorists, and celebrating their government executions, for example) indicates that reality indeed reflects the things you personally don't believe.
reply
If government can force any private company to work specially for government then US is no better than PRC
reply
reply
Legit war time measures can be a thing (that's why it's fucked if president can just start a war and then use that as excuse for any war time measures they like)
reply
And for better or worse, it is actually good that it is like this. Otherwise, if Congress declares war on Iran or China or whatever, the whole country will be put on a war footing, companies will be directed to build whatever the Pentagon says it needs, drafts will be enforced and so on. And it would be pretty ugly.
reply
What happened was different: a private company decided to enforce some terms, as they can do during peace time and they have been bullied in a way that is disgraceful precisely because it didn't happen during war time nor it has been done using the existing laws around that.What is the purpose of having laws in the first place if we accept that the government can rule by intimidation?
What is the purpose of having laws in the first place if we accept that the government can rule by intimidation?
reply
usa was not aggressorfat chance congress declaring war of aggression on a peaceful country
fat chance congress declaring war of aggression on a peaceful country
reply
However, the military is bound by US and international law. It's clear they're not going to obey either of those with respect to this contract.On top of that, Anthropic has correctly pointed out that the use cases Trump was pushing for are well beyond the current capabilities of any of Anthropic models. Misusing their stuff in the way Trump has been (in violation of the contract) is a war crime, because it has already made major mistakes, targeted civilians, etc.
On top of that, Anthropic has correctly pointed out that the use cases Trump was pushing for are well beyond the current capabilities of any of Anthropic models. Misusing their stuff in the way Trump has been (in violation of the contract) is a war crime, because it has already made major mistakes, targeted civilians, etc.
reply
reply
reply
reply
I think it's also possible DoW didn't care about the conditions but just wanted some pretext to punish Anthropic because Dario isn't a Trump boot licker like the rest of the SV CEOs.
reply
reply
And while this administration is brazen about this, it's not really a drastic change anywhere.In fact most EU laws (GPDR, AI regulation, Chat Control) are directly, up front, declaring they themselves won't respect it. They very directly have one set of rules for states, government employees, ... and ANOTHER set of rules for everyone else. And they're incredibly brazen. For private individuals, companies it goes very far, it's essentially impossible to even know what does and does not violate the GPDR, and you can't ask the courts, that's not allowed. You also cannot use the courts to compel government to do anything under these laws.For governments, when it comes to what's allowed, it goes incredibly far. Governments can declare any action legal under the GPDR, before and after the fact, without parliament involvement. It does not matter if that action was done by the government themselves, or if it's an action by a private company (so the government can use subcontractors for any violation of the GPDR)This means that, for THE example given for GPDR protection: medical information. Medical insurance in the EU is either state-owned or has exceptions, the law does the exact opposite of what it appears to do: it makes all your medical information available for medical insurers. And the police (e.g. to find you). And the tax office. And courts. And medical institutions themselves (to deny transplants to smokers). And ... And while doctors (and priests) used to be huge no-no's when it came to information gathering, that's no longer the case. If a doctor uses the state required medical file, your medical information flows straight into a state database, immediately searchable for everyone the GPDR supposedly protects you against.
In fact most EU laws (GPDR, AI regulation, Chat Control) are directly, up front, declaring they themselves won't respect it. They very directly have one set of rules for states, government employees, ... and ANOTHER set of rules for everyone else. And they're incredibly brazen. For private individuals, companies it goes very far, it's essentially impossible to even know what does and does not violate the GPDR, and you can't ask the courts, that's not allowed. You also cannot use the courts to compel government to do anything under these laws.For governments, when it comes to what's allowed, it goes incredibly far. Governments can declare any action legal under the GPDR, before and after the fact, without parliament involvement. It does not matter if that action was done by the government themselves, or if it's an action by a private company (so the government can use subcontractors for any violation of the GPDR)This means that, for THE example given for GPDR protection: medical information. Medical insurance in the EU is either state-owned or has exceptions, the law does the exact opposite of what it appears to do: it makes all your medical information available for medical insurers. And the police (e.g. to find you). And the tax office. And courts. And medical institutions themselves (to deny transplants to smokers). And ... And while doctors (and priests) used to be huge no-no's when it came to information gathering, that's no longer the case. If a doctor uses the state required medical file, your medical information flows straight into a state database, immediately searchable for everyone the GPDR supposedly protects you against.
For governments, when it comes to what's allowed, it goes incredibly far. Governments can declare any action legal under the GPDR, before and after the fact, without parliament involvement. It does not matter if that action was done by the government themselves, or if it's an action by a private company (so the government can use subcontractors for any violation of the GPDR)This means that, for THE example given for GPDR protection: medical information. Medical insurance in the EU is either state-owned or has exceptions, the law does the exact opposite of what it appears to do: it makes all your medical information available for medical insurers. And the police (e.g. to find you). And the tax office. And courts. And medical institutions themselves (to deny transplants to smokers). And ... And while doctors (and priests) used to be huge no-no's when it came to information gathering, that's no longer the case. If a doctor uses the state required medical file, your medical information flows straight into a state database, immediately searchable for everyone the GPDR supposedly protects you against.
This means that, for THE example given for GPDR protection: medical information. Medical insurance in the EU is either state-owned or has exceptions, the law does the exact opposite of what it appears to do: it makes all your medical information available for medical insurers. And the police (e.g. to find you). And the tax office. And courts. And medical institutions themselves (to deny transplants to smokers). And ... And while doctors (and priests) used to be huge no-no's when it came to information gathering, that's no longer the case. If a doctor uses the state required medical file, your medical information flows straight into a state database, immediately searchable for everyone the GPDR supposedly protects you against.
reply
It doesn't match.
reply
OpenAI claims their terms of service for DoD contain the same limitations as Anthropics proposed service agreement. Anthropic claims that this is untrue.Now given that (a) the DoD terminated their deal with Anthropic, (b) stated that they terminated because Anthropic refused modify their terms of service, and (c) then signed a deal with openAI; I am inclined to believe that there is in fact a substantial difference between the terms of service offered by Anthropic and OpenAI.
Now given that (a) the DoD terminated their deal with Anthropic, (b) stated that they terminated because Anthropic refused modify their terms of service, and (c) then signed a deal with openAI; I am inclined to believe that there is in fact a substantial difference between the terms of service offered by Anthropic and OpenAI.
reply
From what I can see, OpenAI's terms basically say “need to comply with the law”, which provides them with plenty of wiggle room with executive orders and whatnot.
reply
And:1. there is no law currently prohibiting autonomous weapons platforms2. the Pentagon can create policies overnight allowing all kinds of stuffSo yeah, OpenAI is going to make a lot of money from actually doing what the military asks from them.
1. there is no law currently prohibiting autonomous weapons platforms2. the Pentagon can create policies overnight allowing all kinds of stuffSo yeah, OpenAI is going to make a lot of money from actually doing what the military asks from them.
2. the Pentagon can create policies overnight allowing all kinds of stuffSo yeah, OpenAI is going to make a lot of money from actually doing what the military asks from them.
So yeah, OpenAI is going to make a lot of money from actually doing what the military asks from them.
reply
If the contract says “all lawful use” it's a blank check to the state.
reply
My understanding is that Anthropic requested visibility and a say into how their models were being used for classified tasks, while the DoD wanted to expand the scope of those tasks into areas that Anthropic found objectionable. Both of those proposals were unacceptable for the other side.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
They sold a service to a customer, contractually subject to terms they both agreed upon. How do people keep missing this? The government changed their mind after agreeing to the restrictions and tried to alter the deal with Anthropic ex-post-facto.
reply
reply
reply
One of the many reasons every company has tried to shift their business model to the latter: greater control over users.
reply
reply
reply
“The real reasons [the Pentagon] and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot),” he wrote, referring to Greg Brockman, OpenAI's president, who gave a Pac supporting Trump $25m in conjunction with his wife.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/04/sam-altma...
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/04/sam-altma...
reply
Another reason is that Sam Altman has been willing to "play ball" like providing high-profile (though meaningless) big announcements Trump likes to tout as successes. For example:> "The Stargate AI data center project worth $500 billion, announced by US President Donald Trump in January 2025, is reportedly running into serious trouble.More than a year after the announcement, the joint venture between OpenAI, Oracle, and Softbank hasn't hired any staff and isn't actively developing any data centers, The Information reports, citing three people involved in the "shelved idea."https://the-decoder.com/stargates-500-billion-ai-infrastruct...
> "The Stargate AI data center project worth $500 billion, announced by US President Donald Trump in January 2025, is reportedly running into serious trouble.More than a year after the announcement, the joint venture between OpenAI, Oracle, and Softbank hasn't hired any staff and isn't actively developing any data centers, The Information reports, citing three people involved in the "shelved idea."https://the-decoder.com/stargates-500-billion-ai-infrastruct...
More than a year after the announcement, the joint venture between OpenAI, Oracle, and Softbank hasn't hired any staff and isn't actively developing any data centers, The Information reports, citing three people involved in the "shelved idea."https://the-decoder.com/stargates-500-billion-ai-infrastruct...
https://the-decoder.com/stargates-500-billion-ai-infrastruct...
reply
http://magamoney.fyi/executives/samuel-h-altman/
reply
Just to nitpick, Palantir isn't doing surveillance like Flock. They do data integration the way IBM does under contract for the governments. Some data pipelines include law enforcement surveillance data which get integrated with other software/databases to help police analyze it. There's no evidence they are collecting it themselves despite recent headlines. It's a relatively minor but important distinction IMO.https://www.wired.com/story/palantir-what-the-company-does/
https://www.wired.com/story/palantir-what-the-company-does/
reply
reply
It's the same with Facebook selling user data. Neither selling your data, like the carriers do, or selling the ability to target you with your data, like Facebook does, are very nice. But legally they are separate things that need to be regulated differently. As is the case with Flock and Palantir.
reply
reply
reply
https://gizmodo.com/palantir-ceo-uses-slur-to-describe-peopl...https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/palantir-ceo-defends-su...
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/palantir-ceo-defends-su...
reply
reply
IBM of course has an problematic history.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
There will always be another IT company willing to do integrations even if Palantir dies. Software isn't going away.
reply
I'm also a little unsure what you're saying here. Are you saying that it's futile to rely on corporate leaders to commit to ethical acts, as there's always someone else who will debase themselves to make money? I think that solely relying on the state to regulate itself with respect to civil liberties is a fast path to despotism. The well-regulated state was always a partnership between ordinary people bravely standing up for their rights and the norms of the rules and laws that made it socially acceptable to do so.If I'm grasping you correctly, I think you're right; however, this points to the rottenness of our culture's way of organizing labor: the optimization of the shareholder over everyone else leads to some really awful effects.
If I'm grasping you correctly, I think you're right; however, this points to the rottenness of our culture's way of organizing labor: the optimization of the shareholder over everyone else leads to some really awful effects.
reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_HolocaustThough, I guess IBM did get away with lots of stuff that... Actually, did any supply companies in the WWII German war machine actually get in trouble for war crimes, or did they just go after officers and the people actually working in the camps?The company selling punchcards that were used for logistics was apparently fine. What about the people making the gas canisters, or supplying plumbing fixtures? The plumbers? Where's the line?Wondering, since this is increasingly becoming a current events question instead of an academic concern.
Though, I guess IBM did get away with lots of stuff that... Actually, did any supply companies in the WWII German war machine actually get in trouble for war crimes, or did they just go after officers and the people actually working in the camps?The company selling punchcards that were used for logistics was apparently fine. What about the people making the gas canisters, or supplying plumbing fixtures? The plumbers? Where's the line?Wondering, since this is increasingly becoming a current events question instead of an academic concern.
The company selling punchcards that were used for logistics was apparently fine. What about the people making the gas canisters, or supplying plumbing fixtures? The plumbers? Where's the line?Wondering, since this is increasingly becoming a current events question instead of an academic concern.
Wondering, since this is increasingly becoming a current events question instead of an academic concern.
reply
I'm under no illusion that all the perpetrators of war crimes were held accountable but it's not a bad model.
reply
reply
> The military's Maven Smart System, which is built by data mining company Palantir, is generating insights from an astonishing amount of classified data from satellites, surveillance and other intelligence, helping provide real-time targeting and target prioritization to military operations in Iran, according to three people familiar with the system...> As planning for a potential strike in Iran was underway, Maven, powered by Claude, suggested hundreds of targets, issued precise location coordinates, and prioritized those targets according to importance, said two of the people.
> As planning for a potential strike in Iran was underway, Maven, powered by Claude, suggested hundreds of targets, issued precise location coordinates, and prioritized those targets according to importance, said two of the people.
reply
reply
Good thing IBM's data integration was never used for ill!Oh, wait https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_World_War_II
Oh, wait https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_World_War_II
reply
reply
Take it out on the database purveyors, not Palantir.
reply
On the other hand, a comment like yours does smack a bit of "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down."
reply
reply
reply
I'm saying that we should give Anthropic the benefit of the doubt that when they say "our deal with Palantir doesn't cross our red line", we should believe Anthropic, that they have gotten an assurance from Palantir that they wouldn't use it domestically. I'm NOT saying we should give Palantir the benefit of the doubt.I wasn't commenting on "is giving AI to Palantir a good idea" (I don't think it is), I was commenting on "should we conclude that Anthropic is being dishonest because they claimed they have red lines but work with Palantir" (I think it's unclear, but there's a plausible explanation in which they're not being dishonest, but possibly naive, so give them the benefit of the doubt).
I wasn't commenting on "is giving AI to Palantir a good idea" (I don't think it is), I was commenting on "should we conclude that Anthropic is being dishonest because they claimed they have red lines but work with Palantir" (I think it's unclear, but there's a plausible explanation in which they're not being dishonest, but possibly naive, so give them the benefit of the doubt).
reply
reply
> “[We will] tailor use restrictions to the mission and legal authorities of a government entity” based on factors such as “the extent of the agency's willingness to engage in ongoing dialogue,” Anthropic says in its terms. The terms, it notes, do not apply to AI systems it considers to “substantially increase the risk of catastrophic misuse,” show “low-level autonomous capabilities,” or that can be used for disinformation campaigns, the design or deployment of weapons, censorship, domestic surveillance, and malicious cyber operations.Source: https://techcrunch.com/2024/11/07/anthropic-teams-up-with-pa...
Source: https://techcrunch.com/2024/11/07/anthropic-teams-up-with-pa...
reply
reply
reply
Anthropic is a Public Benefit Corporation chartered in Delaware, with an expressed commitment to "the responsible development and maintenance of advanced AI for the long-term benefit of humanity."So in theory (IANAL), investors can't easily bully Anthropic into abandoning their mission statement unless they can convince a court that Anthropic deliberately aimed to prioritize the cause over profit.
So in theory (IANAL), investors can't easily bully Anthropic into abandoning their mission statement unless they can convince a court that Anthropic deliberately aimed to prioritize the cause over profit.
reply
So why were they ever working with the military in the first instance, if that's the case? If you didn't gleam from OpenAI that it doesn't matter. Everyone is greedy and will jump ship for money if Anthropic does not get it for them.
reply
reply
Seriously, you're on HN, you can't possibly be that many degrees removed from someone at the company.In any case it's absolutely not "just marketing", it suffuses their whole culture, and it is genuine.
In any case it's absolutely not "just marketing", it suffuses their whole culture, and it is genuine.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
Perhaps you think the law shouldn't allow such a contract; that's a valid position. But that's not what the law currently says.
reply
Is that more clear?
reply
reply
reply
The current administration has been caught flouting court orders in dozens of cases, to the point that courts are no longer even granting them the assumption that they're operating in good faith.I can think of a million good reasons not to give these people the tools to implement automated totalitarianism. Your proposal that they simply refuse service to the government entirely would be ideal.
I can think of a million good reasons not to give these people the tools to implement automated totalitarianism. Your proposal that they simply refuse service to the government entirely would be ideal.
reply
reply
reply
Nowhere did I say elected officials should violate contracts.
reply
If you don't question people in positions of power they will just do whatever they want. Democracy is sustained by action, not by acquiescence.And with the lawlessness of this administration, I would make it a point to hold them accountable. I'm not going to let them do mass surveillance when they decide to change the law.Are you native, or just ignoring what is going on?
And with the lawlessness of this administration, I would make it a point to hold them accountable. I'm not going to let them do mass surveillance when they decide to change the law.Are you native, or just ignoring what is going on?
Are you native, or just ignoring what is going on?
reply
reply
The technology isn't suitable for the purposes the regime wants.
reply
I would like western Democratic powers to have the most advanced technology personally but you may disagree.
reply
I've worked in government outside of the Federal level. The government has a moral and often legal incentive to do inefficient things for the simple reason that the work they do needs to be safe, controlled and deterministic.Any US state maintains a birth registry, death registry and DMV. But firewalls exist so that live links don't exist between these and other programs. It's inefficient, but avoids many hazards and conflicts in regulatory or legal compliance. For example, income tax information is secret, and cannot be shared outside of the tax processing scenario. Police investigatory data should not be linked to your unemployment claim. Fundamentally, those are examples of why the stuff that Palantir is doing is problematic.With military applications, it's even more fraught, and human life is in peril by design. It's important for a professional army like the US Army that strict discipline and rules of engagement are followed. Soldiers may find themselves in situations where people are shooting at them, and they are ordered to take no action.AI is not capable of functioning in that environment.My point is these are complex issues, and we are in a political environment where people seeking simple answers are looking at technology like AI to disconnect them from accountability. There's a nuance there, and a reason why Anthropic is willing to partner with Palantir for their work, but hesitant to powering drones that are dropping hellfire missiles on people.
Any US state maintains a birth registry, death registry and DMV. But firewalls exist so that live links don't exist between these and other programs. It's inefficient, but avoids many hazards and conflicts in regulatory or legal compliance. For example, income tax information is secret, and cannot be shared outside of the tax processing scenario. Police investigatory data should not be linked to your unemployment claim. Fundamentally, those are examples of why the stuff that Palantir is doing is problematic.With military applications, it's even more fraught, and human life is in peril by design. It's important for a professional army like the US Army that strict discipline and rules of engagement are followed. Soldiers may find themselves in situations where people are shooting at them, and they are ordered to take no action.AI is not capable of functioning in that environment.My point is these are complex issues, and we are in a political environment where people seeking simple answers are looking at technology like AI to disconnect them from accountability. There's a nuance there, and a reason why Anthropic is willing to partner with Palantir for their work, but hesitant to powering drones that are dropping hellfire missiles on people.
With military applications, it's even more fraught, and human life is in peril by design. It's important for a professional army like the US Army that strict discipline and rules of engagement are followed. Soldiers may find themselves in situations where people are shooting at them, and they are ordered to take no action.AI is not capable of functioning in that environment.My point is these are complex issues, and we are in a political environment where people seeking simple answers are looking at technology like AI to disconnect them from accountability. There's a nuance there, and a reason why Anthropic is willing to partner with Palantir for their work, but hesitant to powering drones that are dropping hellfire missiles on people.
AI is not capable of functioning in that environment.My point is these are complex issues, and we are in a political environment where people seeking simple answers are looking at technology like AI to disconnect them from accountability. There's a nuance there, and a reason why Anthropic is willing to partner with Palantir for their work, but hesitant to powering drones that are dropping hellfire missiles on people.
My point is these are complex issues, and we are in a political environment where people seeking simple answers are looking at technology like AI to disconnect them from accountability. There's a nuance there, and a reason why Anthropic is willing to partner with Palantir for their work, but hesitant to powering drones that are dropping hellfire missiles on people.
reply
Are you really saying that if Anthropic sells a limited version of their product to Palantir at a certain price, the government should be able to demand access to an unlimited version of Anthropic's product for free because they are a customer of Palantir?That would effectively mean the government gets an unlimited license to all IP of companies that do business with government suppliers... that would be terrible.
That would effectively mean the government gets an unlimited license to all IP of companies that do business with government suppliers... that would be terrible.
reply
reply
Anthropic has a contract for how their service is to be used, the government committed itself to following the contract by signing. Then it violated the contract.Basically the government committed fraud by signing a contract that it clearly intended to violate. Then they tried to bully Anthropic into not doing anything about their breach of contract.It's mobster behavior. You're saying Anthropic should just not sell services if it's going to enforce the terms of service. You have it backwards: the government shouldn't enter into contracts that it intends to violate.
Basically the government committed fraud by signing a contract that it clearly intended to violate. Then they tried to bully Anthropic into not doing anything about their breach of contract.It's mobster behavior. You're saying Anthropic should just not sell services if it's going to enforce the terms of service. You have it backwards: the government shouldn't enter into contracts that it intends to violate.
It's mobster behavior. You're saying Anthropic should just not sell services if it's going to enforce the terms of service. You have it backwards: the government shouldn't enter into contracts that it intends to violate.
reply
They've done lots wrong and maybe they shouldn't have gotten in bed with the military to begin with, but this illegal war is not theirs. It rests squarely with the President who declared it. (And with the military officers who are going along with it despite the violation of international law.)
reply
Anthropic claim that superintelligence is coming, that unaligned AI is an existential threat to humanity, and they are the only ones responsible enough to control it.If that's your world view, why would you be willing to accept someone's word that they'll only Do Good Things with it? And not just "someone", someone with access to the world's most powerful nuclear arsenal? A contract is meaningless if the world gets obliterated in nuclear war.
If that's your world view, why would you be willing to accept someone's word that they'll only Do Good Things with it? And not just "someone", someone with access to the world's most powerful nuclear arsenal? A contract is meaningless if the world gets obliterated in nuclear war.
reply
So I don't blame Anthropic for getting into bed with the military, and getting out when it got bad for them. A lot of military suppliers are facing a similar dilemma, I suspect. The army runs on its stomach, and I do not envy the people delivering pizzas to the Pentagon, knowing what room those pizzas are consumed in.
reply
reply
Also, doing that might have bad second order effects with bad ethical implications.For example, when Musk decided to pull the plug on a bunch of starlink terminals, he (intentionally and knowingly) blocked a US-funded attack that would have sunk a big chunk of the Russian navy, which certainly prolonged the Ukraine war. That was clearly an act of treason (illegal).Anyway, just turning off Claude could kill a bunch of civilians in the region or something. It depends on how deeply it's integrated into military logistics at this point.Anyway, your point certainly holds for OpenAI:They walked into a "use ChatGPT for war crimes, and illegal domestic surveillance / 'law enforcement'" deal with open eyes, and pretty obviously lied about it while the deal was being signed. I don't see any ethical nuance that would even partially excuse their actions.
For example, when Musk decided to pull the plug on a bunch of starlink terminals, he (intentionally and knowingly) blocked a US-funded attack that would have sunk a big chunk of the Russian navy, which certainly prolonged the Ukraine war. That was clearly an act of treason (illegal).Anyway, just turning off Claude could kill a bunch of civilians in the region or something. It depends on how deeply it's integrated into military logistics at this point.Anyway, your point certainly holds for OpenAI:They walked into a "use ChatGPT for war crimes, and illegal domestic surveillance / 'law enforcement'" deal with open eyes, and pretty obviously lied about it while the deal was being signed. I don't see any ethical nuance that would even partially excuse their actions.
Anyway, just turning off Claude could kill a bunch of civilians in the region or something. It depends on how deeply it's integrated into military logistics at this point.Anyway, your point certainly holds for OpenAI:They walked into a "use ChatGPT for war crimes, and illegal domestic surveillance / 'law enforcement'" deal with open eyes, and pretty obviously lied about it while the deal was being signed. I don't see any ethical nuance that would even partially excuse their actions.
Anyway, your point certainly holds for OpenAI:They walked into a "use ChatGPT for war crimes, and illegal domestic surveillance / 'law enforcement'" deal with open eyes, and pretty obviously lied about it while the deal was being signed. I don't see any ethical nuance that would even partially excuse their actions.
They walked into a "use ChatGPT for war crimes, and illegal domestic surveillance / 'law enforcement'" deal with open eyes, and pretty obviously lied about it while the deal was being signed. I don't see any ethical nuance that would even partially excuse their actions.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
Edit: Also openly calling OpenAI employees "gullible" and "twitter morons" seems sub-optimal if you like that talent to work for you at some point.Example - https://x.com/tszzl/status/2029334980481212820
Example - https://x.com/tszzl/status/2029334980481212820
reply
They might not if they think everybody who stayed after Sam Altman was reinstated might be excellent technically speaking yet not have the culture they want, which seems to be the case with all the recent communication.
reply
reply
“I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes.... It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees. Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.”
reply
Would buy their stock, would sell OpenAI, maaybe. If it was public. Maybe instead of MSFT and AMZN I bought
reply
reply
In retrospect this quote comes across as way more foreboding given what we've learned about the scale of his ambitions and his willingness to lie and bend reality to gain power.Dario on the other hand seems to have an integrity that's particularly rare in this era. I hope he remains strong in the face of the regime.
Dario on the other hand seems to have an integrity that's particularly rare in this era. I hope he remains strong in the face of the regime.
reply
Anthropic actually partnered up with Palantir. They are not the saints you think they are, either.We should stop worshipping people and companies and stop putting them on pedestals.
Just because one party is at fault, doesn't mean the other is automatically innocent. These are all for-profit companies at play here.https://investors.palantir.com/news-details/2024/Anthropic-a...
We should stop worshipping people and companies and stop putting them on pedestals.
Just because one party is at fault, doesn't mean the other is automatically innocent. These are all for-profit companies at play here.https://investors.palantir.com/news-details/2024/Anthropic-a...
https://investors.palantir.com/news-details/2024/Anthropic-a...
reply
> Broadly, I am supportive of arming democracies with the tools needed to defeat autocracies in the age of AI—I simply don't think there is any other way. But we cannot ignore the potential for abuse of these technologies by democratic governments themselves. Democracies normally have safeguards that prevent their military and intelligence apparatus from being turned inwards against their own population, but because AI tools require so few people to operate, there is potential for them to circumvent these safeguards and the norms that support them. It is also worth noting that some of these safeguards are already gradually eroding in some democracies. Thus, we should arm democracies with AI, but we should do so carefully and within limits: they are the immune system we need to fight autocracies, but like the immune system, there is some risk of them turning on us and becoming a threat themselves.Basically, he's afraid that not arming the government with AI puts it at a disadvantage vs. other governments he trusts less. Plus, if Anthropic is in the loop that gives them the chance to steer the direction of things a bit (what they were kicked out for doing).It's not the purest ethical argument, but I also would not say that there is a clearly correct answer.
Basically, he's afraid that not arming the government with AI puts it at a disadvantage vs. other governments he trusts less. Plus, if Anthropic is in the loop that gives them the chance to steer the direction of things a bit (what they were kicked out for doing).It's not the purest ethical argument, but I also would not say that there is a clearly correct answer.
It's not the purest ethical argument, but I also would not say that there is a clearly correct answer.
reply
Brutally honest, to me it just sounds like a very elaborate way to say "trust me, bro"
reply
reply
reply
reply
It wasn't, there's been non-stop talk here for days about how Anthropic is a step-above, better-than-the-rest, the "only good AI" company. Enough already. It is a marketing tactic they are taking in opposition to OpenAI.
reply
reply
reply
The contract was explicit - it was for defence purposes with a company known for spying activities. So, obviously spying is involved and they weren't just going to generate cat videos with it.Again, nobody is innocent here.
Again, nobody is innocent here.
reply
reply
"Anthropic and Palantir Partner to Bring Claude AI Models to AWS for U.S. Government Intelligence and Defense Operations"Keywords: "Government Intelligence"
Keywords: "Government Intelligence"
reply
reply
And now you've got people on here saying, well actually Palantir ain't so bad, you see! They're just one tool in the chain, basically just boring data integration, like IBM!The mental gymnastics is difficult to keep up with.
The mental gymnastics is difficult to keep up with.
reply
reply
I read that quote and see no positive interpretation. It was always a negative description.I think maybe this community could use a bit more natural skepticism of hierarchy.
I think maybe this community could use a bit more natural skepticism of hierarchy.
reply
His ascendancy only came when he basically was given an ulta powerful position by an ultra powerful man.
reply
reply
reply
Someone told me in another comment that it's possibly bot activity. I suspect so too, because in a tech forum like HN, a top voted comment can shift the entire focus/narrative of any given issue. I know there are a lot of mods on here to prevent this sort of thing, but given how good LLMs have gotten, I wonder if we are at a point where humans can even discern cases where this a mix of human and AI involvement in online activity (such as commenting).
reply
reply
I don't know if you've noticed, but HN has been full of Reddit-tier comments, most especially around hot-button political topics, for a while now.
reply
reply
The entire point of the forum is to talk about rich "idea people" and the businesses they start to get richer.
reply
(Or, if the maximally cynical perspective is correct and 'principles' always actually means 'a company culture and public image that depends on the appearance of having principles, and which requires costly signals of principledness to maintain' -- well, why on earth shouldn't we favour the ones who have that property over the ones who are nakedly unprincipled, and the ones who have a paper-thin veneer that doesn't meaningfully affect their behaviour? It would be stupid to throw away the one bit of leverage we have to make powerful people behave better than they otherwise would.)
reply
reply
> Graham was immediately impressed by Altman, later recalling that meeting the 19-year-old felt like what it must have been like to talk to Bill Gates at the same age. He noted Altman's intense "force of will" from their early interactions.Is there a Gates-like "presence" or a "force of will" displayed in his public interviews?
Is there a Gates-like "presence" or a "force of will" displayed in his public interviews?
reply
reply
reply
reply
its not a comment on his ethics or morality
reply
Paul Graham was a pudgy mediocrity clever enough to capitalize on nerds' obsession with Lisp, and leverage it into f-you money. Game recognized game in the shape of Sam Altman.
reply
lol
reply
Which of these two CEOs wants to have an unelected spot in the decision loop of our government?Once I dug into this story, I realized that only one of these companies was attempting a real power grab. Maybe the EAs are doomed to try coup after coup and lose every time.The SCR part is excessive, though, especially if it's interpreted broadly. Altman gets credit for sticking up for Anthropic on that point, but not much credit, because it's so obvious that it's overkill.
Once I dug into this story, I realized that only one of these companies was attempting a real power grab. Maybe the EAs are doomed to try coup after coup and lose every time.The SCR part is excessive, though, especially if it's interpreted broadly. Altman gets credit for sticking up for Anthropic on that point, but not much credit, because it's so obvious that it's overkill.
The SCR part is excessive, though, especially if it's interpreted broadly. Altman gets credit for sticking up for Anthropic on that point, but not much credit, because it's so obvious that it's overkill.
reply
reply
reply
reply
dario comes across like a guy who has never even been in a fight and cant believe a fight is even real.there is something very dangerous about a person who believes that they are "good" and then believes that in fact their version of good is superior to the government, and they should ignore the government which ostensibly represents the people, while building a technology that will make millions of white collar jobs go away (democrat voters) and revolutionise violence (dod/dow - republican voters)imagine if IBM decided in 1960s they were going to start telling NASA/DOD how to use their mainframes and saying USgov couldnt have an IBM if they were going to use it in vietnam etcthat said, i use claude
there is something very dangerous about a person who believes that they are "good" and then believes that in fact their version of good is superior to the government, and they should ignore the government which ostensibly represents the people, while building a technology that will make millions of white collar jobs go away (democrat voters) and revolutionise violence (dod/dow - republican voters)imagine if IBM decided in 1960s they were going to start telling NASA/DOD how to use their mainframes and saying USgov couldnt have an IBM if they were going to use it in vietnam etcthat said, i use claude
imagine if IBM decided in 1960s they were going to start telling NASA/DOD how to use their mainframes and saying USgov couldnt have an IBM if they were going to use it in vietnam etcthat said, i use claude
that said, i use claude
reply
Barely represents the people. Especially not on the issue of domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous killing machines. Or the war in Vietnam.
reply
absurd yes but same principle. companies have to be subject to government especially in technologies that enable or manage violence. this is because the role of the government is to collectively manage and allocate violence in the manner the people desire
reply
I don't know what you're describing, but it's not how the US works.Companies aren't extensions of the state; they're private actors that have to follow the law. If Congress wants something prohibited, it passes a law. Otherwise firms are free to choose who they do business with.
Companies aren't extensions of the state; they're private actors that have to follow the law. If Congress wants something prohibited, it passes a law. Otherwise firms are free to choose who they do business with.
reply
companies and the people who work for them are subject to the state via the law and regulations. if they violate the law, the state will use violence to enforce the law, with a government entity called law enforcement and law enforcement officers.if new technologies are invented, like the internet, missiles, nuclear power, and so on, which represent an ability to manage and allocate violence, or remove the state ability to control violence, the government needs to reassert their monopoly on that violence and take control of it. without this monopoly, how will they collect taxes and enforce the law?without the monopoly on violence the government is little more than an idea
if new technologies are invented, like the internet, missiles, nuclear power, and so on, which represent an ability to manage and allocate violence, or remove the state ability to control violence, the government needs to reassert their monopoly on that violence and take control of it. without this monopoly, how will they collect taxes and enforce the law?without the monopoly on violence the government is little more than an idea
without the monopoly on violence the government is little more than an idea
reply
reply
"On October 30, 2023, President Biden invoked the Defense Production Act to "require that developers of the most powerful AI systems share their safety test results and other critical information with the U.S. government" when "developing any foundation model that poses a serious risk to national security, national economic security, or national public health."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_Production_Act_of_1950
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
This one is unusual in that the government started bailing out the AI companies last year. Usually, it waits until the bubble pops, and then starts the bail outs.That's standard operating procedure for Trump though.He did the same thing in 2016-19 with the zero interest rate policy + tax cuts even though the economy was strong. Any macroeconomics book (or NPR station during those years) will tell you that doing that creates short-term economic growth, but sets the next administration up for [hyper-]inflation.Of course, that happened, and those same books go on to say "and, usually, because inflation takes a bit to kick in, the next president will be blamed. This is why we have an independent Fed".So, this time around, he's trying to pull the same crap by dismantling the Fed, and, until then, lean hard into deficit spending to keep unemployment low. Last year, money went to data centers, and domestic paramilitary actions and prison build-outs. This year, we have those things and a new pointless forever war.However, it's not working the same way as it did last time. He's done so much other collateral damage that we're in a "boomcession" where the economic indicators become untethered from reality. So, they show growth, but people's quality of life, spending power, job security, and so on all decrease.For example, a piece of the GDP is "how much does your bank screw you per year on your checking account?". This is treated like discretionary spending, and it's gone up from a few hundred a year to over $2000 in 2025. That increase counts as economic growth, instead of institutionalized theft.Medical spending increases drove all the US's GDP growth last quarter. The quarter before that, it was spending on AI datacenters that's backed by junk loans and federal dollars.Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
That's standard operating procedure for Trump though.He did the same thing in 2016-19 with the zero interest rate policy + tax cuts even though the economy was strong. Any macroeconomics book (or NPR station during those years) will tell you that doing that creates short-term economic growth, but sets the next administration up for [hyper-]inflation.Of course, that happened, and those same books go on to say "and, usually, because inflation takes a bit to kick in, the next president will be blamed. This is why we have an independent Fed".So, this time around, he's trying to pull the same crap by dismantling the Fed, and, until then, lean hard into deficit spending to keep unemployment low. Last year, money went to data centers, and domestic paramilitary actions and prison build-outs. This year, we have those things and a new pointless forever war.However, it's not working the same way as it did last time. He's done so much other collateral damage that we're in a "boomcession" where the economic indicators become untethered from reality. So, they show growth, but people's quality of life, spending power, job security, and so on all decrease.For example, a piece of the GDP is "how much does your bank screw you per year on your checking account?". This is treated like discretionary spending, and it's gone up from a few hundred a year to over $2000 in 2025. That increase counts as economic growth, instead of institutionalized theft.Medical spending increases drove all the US's GDP growth last quarter. The quarter before that, it was spending on AI datacenters that's backed by junk loans and federal dollars.Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
He did the same thing in 2016-19 with the zero interest rate policy + tax cuts even though the economy was strong. Any macroeconomics book (or NPR station during those years) will tell you that doing that creates short-term economic growth, but sets the next administration up for [hyper-]inflation.Of course, that happened, and those same books go on to say "and, usually, because inflation takes a bit to kick in, the next president will be blamed. This is why we have an independent Fed".So, this time around, he's trying to pull the same crap by dismantling the Fed, and, until then, lean hard into deficit spending to keep unemployment low. Last year, money went to data centers, and domestic paramilitary actions and prison build-outs. This year, we have those things and a new pointless forever war.However, it's not working the same way as it did last time. He's done so much other collateral damage that we're in a "boomcession" where the economic indicators become untethered from reality. So, they show growth, but people's quality of life, spending power, job security, and so on all decrease.For example, a piece of the GDP is "how much does your bank screw you per year on your checking account?". This is treated like discretionary spending, and it's gone up from a few hundred a year to over $2000 in 2025. That increase counts as economic growth, instead of institutionalized theft.Medical spending increases drove all the US's GDP growth last quarter. The quarter before that, it was spending on AI datacenters that's backed by junk loans and federal dollars.Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
Of course, that happened, and those same books go on to say "and, usually, because inflation takes a bit to kick in, the next president will be blamed. This is why we have an independent Fed".So, this time around, he's trying to pull the same crap by dismantling the Fed, and, until then, lean hard into deficit spending to keep unemployment low. Last year, money went to data centers, and domestic paramilitary actions and prison build-outs. This year, we have those things and a new pointless forever war.However, it's not working the same way as it did last time. He's done so much other collateral damage that we're in a "boomcession" where the economic indicators become untethered from reality. So, they show growth, but people's quality of life, spending power, job security, and so on all decrease.For example, a piece of the GDP is "how much does your bank screw you per year on your checking account?". This is treated like discretionary spending, and it's gone up from a few hundred a year to over $2000 in 2025. That increase counts as economic growth, instead of institutionalized theft.Medical spending increases drove all the US's GDP growth last quarter. The quarter before that, it was spending on AI datacenters that's backed by junk loans and federal dollars.Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
So, this time around, he's trying to pull the same crap by dismantling the Fed, and, until then, lean hard into deficit spending to keep unemployment low. Last year, money went to data centers, and domestic paramilitary actions and prison build-outs. This year, we have those things and a new pointless forever war.However, it's not working the same way as it did last time. He's done so much other collateral damage that we're in a "boomcession" where the economic indicators become untethered from reality. So, they show growth, but people's quality of life, spending power, job security, and so on all decrease.For example, a piece of the GDP is "how much does your bank screw you per year on your checking account?". This is treated like discretionary spending, and it's gone up from a few hundred a year to over $2000 in 2025. That increase counts as economic growth, instead of institutionalized theft.Medical spending increases drove all the US's GDP growth last quarter. The quarter before that, it was spending on AI datacenters that's backed by junk loans and federal dollars.Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
However, it's not working the same way as it did last time. He's done so much other collateral damage that we're in a "boomcession" where the economic indicators become untethered from reality. So, they show growth, but people's quality of life, spending power, job security, and so on all decrease.For example, a piece of the GDP is "how much does your bank screw you per year on your checking account?". This is treated like discretionary spending, and it's gone up from a few hundred a year to over $2000 in 2025. That increase counts as economic growth, instead of institutionalized theft.Medical spending increases drove all the US's GDP growth last quarter. The quarter before that, it was spending on AI datacenters that's backed by junk loans and federal dollars.Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
For example, a piece of the GDP is "how much does your bank screw you per year on your checking account?". This is treated like discretionary spending, and it's gone up from a few hundred a year to over $2000 in 2025. That increase counts as economic growth, instead of institutionalized theft.Medical spending increases drove all the US's GDP growth last quarter. The quarter before that, it was spending on AI datacenters that's backed by junk loans and federal dollars.Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
Medical spending increases drove all the US's GDP growth last quarter. The quarter before that, it was spending on AI datacenters that's backed by junk loans and federal dollars.Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
Anyway, I don't have an answer for your question better than "bubble", but the current economic cycle is not what you described. It is a "boomcession". As far as I can tell, it's a new class of economic disaster, at least in the US.
reply
reply
reply
What did you think the "Capital" in capitalism referred to? It doesn't refer to you and me
reply
Sadly this place is full of noise and people who don't get the big picture - leading to the down voting of posts and continual drowning out of stuff closer to the truth by noise and hysteria.
reply
reply
reply
I've now moved to Claude and it's much better actually, if like me you hate their fonts (Anthropic Sans) select System fonts in the Claude preferences and you can use this snippet in Safari's Settings -> Advanced -> Stylesheet to make everything your default system font:[data-theme=claude] * {
font-family: system-ui, sans-serif !important;
}
[data-theme=claude] * {
font-family: system-ui, sans-serif !important;
}
reply
reply
The guy can lie with a perfectly straight face. He's the kind of person who tells another lie just to cover the last one, and then another to cover that.Meanwhile he keeps making everyone more and more dependent on him, so by the time people finally realize what's going on, they can't afford to push him out.
Meanwhile he keeps making everyone more and more dependent on him, so by the time people finally realize what's going on, they can't afford to push him out.
reply
Posted here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47195085
reply
reply
They are not the exception, and are just as bloodlessly, shamelessly publicity hungry as any other tech co, if not more so. No surprise based on their conduct up until this fake event.https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47256452
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47256452
reply
Also if you've ever actually chatted with anyone at the company you'd know that they are not all the same and Anthropic genuinely does stand apart here.
reply
Do memos have special magic properties or something? What am I missing here?
reply
I encourage you to do the same.Claude Desktop is better anyway -- and, as we have seen, Anthropic is a more ethical company.
Claude Desktop is better anyway -- and, as we have seen, Anthropic is a more ethical company.
reply
reply
reply
reply
Could you point me to one other $300B+ company that would be willing to do this?
reply
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47145963Just trying to make sure folks aren't getting ahead of themselves, without having put some custom thought into it.If you want to put them on a pedestal for reasons that make sense to you, all good.If others are encouraged to form their own opinions by taking some pause for thought, then all the better.If Anthropic still end up on the pedestal, it must be for the right reasons, as opposed to 'just because they're not the currently discussed villain'.
Just trying to make sure folks aren't getting ahead of themselves, without having put some custom thought into it.If you want to put them on a pedestal for reasons that make sense to you, all good.If others are encouraged to form their own opinions by taking some pause for thought, then all the better.If Anthropic still end up on the pedestal, it must be for the right reasons, as opposed to 'just because they're not the currently discussed villain'.
If you want to put them on a pedestal for reasons that make sense to you, all good.If others are encouraged to form their own opinions by taking some pause for thought, then all the better.If Anthropic still end up on the pedestal, it must be for the right reasons, as opposed to 'just because they're not the currently discussed villain'.
If others are encouraged to form their own opinions by taking some pause for thought, then all the better.If Anthropic still end up on the pedestal, it must be for the right reasons, as opposed to 'just because they're not the currently discussed villain'.
If Anthropic still end up on the pedestal, it must be for the right reasons, as opposed to 'just because they're not the currently discussed villain'.
reply
He has my respect for that
reply
reply
Those who know better please correct me. My current understanding of Palantir (and other surveillance tech companies like Peregrine) is:1. They facilitate the sale of data to law enforcement, enabling the government to circumvent fourth amendment protections.2. They fuse cross-government agency data through Foundry and fuse them into unified profiles which the government can use to surveil and pressure citizens without probable cause or a warrant.ICE also uses a Palantir tool called ELITE to build deportation target lists.EDIT: Downvoting my comment without any proper rebuttal or clarification is pretty silly.
1. They facilitate the sale of data to law enforcement, enabling the government to circumvent fourth amendment protections.2. They fuse cross-government agency data through Foundry and fuse them into unified profiles which the government can use to surveil and pressure citizens without probable cause or a warrant.ICE also uses a Palantir tool called ELITE to build deportation target lists.EDIT: Downvoting my comment without any proper rebuttal or clarification is pretty silly.
2. They fuse cross-government agency data through Foundry and fuse them into unified profiles which the government can use to surveil and pressure citizens without probable cause or a warrant.ICE also uses a Palantir tool called ELITE to build deportation target lists.EDIT: Downvoting my comment without any proper rebuttal or clarification is pretty silly.
ICE also uses a Palantir tool called ELITE to build deportation target lists.EDIT: Downvoting my comment without any proper rebuttal or clarification is pretty silly.
EDIT: Downvoting my comment without any proper rebuttal or clarification is pretty silly.
reply
I do agree with your point that Amodei is playing a game though. Whether he's winning the bigger picture or not it's unclear. His red lines are already so watered out, like how domestic surveillance is not ok, but international? totally fine.
reply
reply
reply
reply
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_(...I suspect the 2007 in the title refers to the fact that bills were passed to ban this stuff in 2007, which is when the PRISM program (also illegal domestic surveillance) got started.(The title makes it sound like warrantless surveillance lasted from 2001-2007, but I think it means the article only covers that date range.)
I suspect the 2007 in the title refers to the fact that bills were passed to ban this stuff in 2007, which is when the PRISM program (also illegal domestic surveillance) got started.(The title makes it sound like warrantless surveillance lasted from 2001-2007, but I think it means the article only covers that date range.)
(The title makes it sound like warrantless surveillance lasted from 2001-2007, but I think it means the article only covers that date range.)
reply
It's difficult to get someone to understand something when their paycheck depends on their not understanding.
reply
Neither know how to solve the alignment problem while market pressures are making them race towards capabilities (long horizon, continual learning) that will have disastrous consequences .
reply
reply
I don't know how reliable that source is. In any case, here's the text from that link, for posterity:"I want to be very clear on the messaging that is coming from OpenAI, and the mendacious nature of it. This is an example of who they really are, and I want to make sure everything sees it for what it is. Although there is a lot we don't know about the contract they signed with DoW (and that maybe they don't even know as well — it could be highly unclear), we do know the following:Sam's description and the DoW description give the strong impression (although we would have to see the actual contract to be certain) that how their contract works is that the model is made available without any legal restrictions ("all lawful usee") but that there is a "safety layer", which I think amounts to model refusals, that prevents the model from completing certain tasks or engaging in certain applications."Safety layer" could also mean something that partners such as Palantir tried to offer us during these negotiations,which is that they on their end offered us some kind of classifier or machine learning system, or software layer, that claims to allow some applications and not others. There is also some suggestion of OpenAI employees ("FDE's") looking over the usage of the model to prevent bad applications.Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy, are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safety theater. The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonomous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data is it analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse:our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide".Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAI employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAI's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAI accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simultaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAI and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
"I want to be very clear on the messaging that is coming from OpenAI, and the mendacious nature of it. This is an example of who they really are, and I want to make sure everything sees it for what it is. Although there is a lot we don't know about the contract they signed with DoW (and that maybe they don't even know as well — it could be highly unclear), we do know the following:Sam's description and the DoW description give the strong impression (although we would have to see the actual contract to be certain) that how their contract works is that the model is made available without any legal restrictions ("all lawful usee") but that there is a "safety layer", which I think amounts to model refusals, that prevents the model from completing certain tasks or engaging in certain applications."Safety layer" could also mean something that partners such as Palantir tried to offer us during these negotiations,which is that they on their end offered us some kind of classifier or machine learning system, or software layer, that claims to allow some applications and not others. There is also some suggestion of OpenAI employees ("FDE's") looking over the usage of the model to prevent bad applications.Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy, are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safety theater. The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonomous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data is it analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse:our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide".Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAI employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAI's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAI accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simultaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAI and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Sam's description and the DoW description give the strong impression (although we would have to see the actual contract to be certain) that how their contract works is that the model is made available without any legal restrictions ("all lawful usee") but that there is a "safety layer", which I think amounts to model refusals, that prevents the model from completing certain tasks or engaging in certain applications."Safety layer" could also mean something that partners such as Palantir tried to offer us during these negotiations,which is that they on their end offered us some kind of classifier or machine learning system, or software layer, that claims to allow some applications and not others. There is also some suggestion of OpenAI employees ("FDE's") looking over the usage of the model to prevent bad applications.Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy, are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safety theater. The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonomous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data is it analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse:our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide".Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAI employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAI's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAI accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simultaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAI and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
"Safety layer" could also mean something that partners such as Palantir tried to offer us during these negotiations,which is that they on their end offered us some kind of classifier or machine learning system, or software layer, that claims to allow some applications and not others. There is also some suggestion of OpenAI employees ("FDE's") looking over the usage of the model to prevent bad applications.Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy, are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safety theater. The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonomous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data is it analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse:our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide".Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAI employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAI's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAI accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simultaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAI and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy, are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safety theater. The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonomous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data is it analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse:our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide".Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAI employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAI's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAI accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simultaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAI and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse:our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide".Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAI employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAI's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAI accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simultaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAI and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAI employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAI's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAI accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simultaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAI and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAI accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simultaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAI and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAIs terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAI's terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAI's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre--AI world but take on a different meaning in a post-AI world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that Ive seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropic's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He also presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1.) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, and (2.) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agenda, we've told the truth about a number of AI policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palantir, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAI's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). Itis working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAI employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees."
reply
Life is this simple: in any argument, when someone attacks the person, instead of the topic, that's when you discover that they understand the topic is indefensible.
reply
Does the administration really believe these AIs are like digital humans?
reply
He doesn't seem to care if the DoW uses his AI for international spying.That's one more reason why Europe needs sovereign tech.
That's one more reason why Europe needs sovereign tech.
reply
https://www.reddit.com/r/Anthropic/comments/1rl1ula/dario_tr...
reply
reply
reply
> However, only an act of Congress can legally and formally change the department's name and secretary's title, so "Department of Defense" and "secretary of defense" remain legally official.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_De...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_De...
reply
HypocrAIsy...
reply
reply
[1] -- https://edition.cnn.com/videos/business/2020/07/24/thiel-pal...
reply
reply
reply
reply
I've long thought that OpenAI was a corrupt bunch.Except for embedding (which I plan to move soon), I have quit my OpenAI accounts. I don't like them.
Except for embedding (which I plan to move soon), I have quit my OpenAI accounts. I don't like them.
reply
reply
Of course, a company should have freedom to choose not to do business with the government. I just think that automatically assuming the worst intention of the government is not as productive as setting up good enough legal framework to limit government's power.
reply
reply
In a world where LLMs produce very convincing but subtly wrong output, this makes me uncomfortable. I get that warfare without AI is in the past now, but war and rules of engagement and AI output etc etc etc all seem fuzzy enough that this is not yet a good call even if you agree with the end goals.
reply
I'm sorry, you've just literally described a "killer robot" in more words.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
Where autonomous transformer-based munitions will be used are basically "here is a photo of a face, find and kill this human" and loitering munitions will take their time analyzing video and then decide to identify and attack a target on their own.EDIT: Or worse: "identify suspicious humans and kill them"
EDIT: Or worse: "identify suspicious humans and kill them"
reply
reply
Its not fully autonomous ice cream machines, its fully autonomous _weapons_. are you stupid or are you dumb? I don't think you're asking an honest question.
reply
For that matter, explain why the Pentagon would balk at not spying on every American.
reply
reply
reply
reply
The government asks if they can rent your car. I hope we agree that you don't have to say yes. (Specific exceptions exist to places of lodging etc.)Anthropic is exercising their right to say no in the same way.
Anthropic is exercising their right to say no in the same way.
reply
Also, that very much sounds like the government knows best and citizens should just trust it unconditionally.
reply
Misunderstanding of what is happening. They have terms and conditions with their private property that anyone can choose to accept or decline. The DoD wants to them turn around and say these terms for a private company's contract around licensing of their private property are so egregious that the government and all government contract holders should be forced out of using any products by that company
reply
reply
(FWIW I am with you; I haven't found a local model that works well enough to be a daily driver)
reply
reply
reply
In a way, I admire Dario's stance and having the backbone to stand up to a government that is so happy to punish, legally or illegally, those that disagree with them. I certainly wouldn't have the bravery (or stupidity) in his position — which frankly makes me happy that he's running Anthropic and not someone like me…
reply
It is a shame that CEOs act like Kings and Queens and there is no accountability anymore. This concrete example is just part of a bigger trend to lie to the public and get away with it.
reply
reply
The dead internet is alive and well.
reply
reply
Maybe it's not much and they probably won't care but taking no action here it's the same as being complicit.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
~93 Employees signed up the notdivided.org petition. Some of OAI employees could be reading this comment right now.Let's be real, OpenAI backstabbed Anthropic. Even Dario has essentially just said it now.(Shameless plug?) but I created an ASK HN about it: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition [0] and not a single person from OAI responded when I just wanted to discuss :/ and hey that's fine I don't mind but please don't mind me either when I re-raise this topicFrom a comment from the thread about OAI on hackernews by tedsanders (OAI employee) [Please don't harass anybody]> I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue competing on the basis of differing services and not differing scruples). Given this understanding, I don't see why I should quit. If it turns out that the deal is being misdescribed or that it won't be enforced, I can see why I should quit, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that's the case.Ted, if you are reading this, I truly felt like you were right. I was still skeptic because part of me felt like it doesn't make sense and well it didn't. But I had trusted ya and I thought that you had far greater insights than us but now I am not sure...Sir, I have no ill-will towards you but I just want to know, you have gone silent after this comment and one another about GPT 5.3 instant as far as I can see. You did say in the first that you will go out on a limb with public comment, so please don't mind me if I ask questions in public about that commentThe question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
Let's be real, OpenAI backstabbed Anthropic. Even Dario has essentially just said it now.(Shameless plug?) but I created an ASK HN about it: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition [0] and not a single person from OAI responded when I just wanted to discuss :/ and hey that's fine I don't mind but please don't mind me either when I re-raise this topicFrom a comment from the thread about OAI on hackernews by tedsanders (OAI employee) [Please don't harass anybody]> I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue competing on the basis of differing services and not differing scruples). Given this understanding, I don't see why I should quit. If it turns out that the deal is being misdescribed or that it won't be enforced, I can see why I should quit, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that's the case.Ted, if you are reading this, I truly felt like you were right. I was still skeptic because part of me felt like it doesn't make sense and well it didn't. But I had trusted ya and I thought that you had far greater insights than us but now I am not sure...Sir, I have no ill-will towards you but I just want to know, you have gone silent after this comment and one another about GPT 5.3 instant as far as I can see. You did say in the first that you will go out on a limb with public comment, so please don't mind me if I ask questions in public about that commentThe question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
(Shameless plug?) but I created an ASK HN about it: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition [0] and not a single person from OAI responded when I just wanted to discuss :/ and hey that's fine I don't mind but please don't mind me either when I re-raise this topicFrom a comment from the thread about OAI on hackernews by tedsanders (OAI employee) [Please don't harass anybody]> I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue competing on the basis of differing services and not differing scruples). Given this understanding, I don't see why I should quit. If it turns out that the deal is being misdescribed or that it won't be enforced, I can see why I should quit, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that's the case.Ted, if you are reading this, I truly felt like you were right. I was still skeptic because part of me felt like it doesn't make sense and well it didn't. But I had trusted ya and I thought that you had far greater insights than us but now I am not sure...Sir, I have no ill-will towards you but I just want to know, you have gone silent after this comment and one another about GPT 5.3 instant as far as I can see. You did say in the first that you will go out on a limb with public comment, so please don't mind me if I ask questions in public about that commentThe question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
From a comment from the thread about OAI on hackernews by tedsanders (OAI employee) [Please don't harass anybody]> I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue competing on the basis of differing services and not differing scruples). Given this understanding, I don't see why I should quit. If it turns out that the deal is being misdescribed or that it won't be enforced, I can see why I should quit, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that's the case.Ted, if you are reading this, I truly felt like you were right. I was still skeptic because part of me felt like it doesn't make sense and well it didn't. But I had trusted ya and I thought that you had far greater insights than us but now I am not sure...Sir, I have no ill-will towards you but I just want to know, you have gone silent after this comment and one another about GPT 5.3 instant as far as I can see. You did say in the first that you will go out on a limb with public comment, so please don't mind me if I ask questions in public about that commentThe question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
> I'm an OpenAI employee and I'll go out on a limb with a public comment. I agree AI shouldn't be used for mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. I also think Anthropic has been treated terribly and has acted admirably. My understanding is that the OpenAI deal disallows domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons, and that OpenAI is asking for the same terms for other AI companies (so that we can continue competing on the basis of differing services and not differing scruples). Given this understanding, I don't see why I should quit. If it turns out that the deal is being misdescribed or that it won't be enforced, I can see why I should quit, but so far I haven't seen any evidence that's the case.Ted, if you are reading this, I truly felt like you were right. I was still skeptic because part of me felt like it doesn't make sense and well it didn't. But I had trusted ya and I thought that you had far greater insights than us but now I am not sure...Sir, I have no ill-will towards you but I just want to know, you have gone silent after this comment and one another about GPT 5.3 instant as far as I can see. You did say in the first that you will go out on a limb with public comment, so please don't mind me if I ask questions in public about that commentThe question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
Ted, if you are reading this, I truly felt like you were right. I was still skeptic because part of me felt like it doesn't make sense and well it didn't. But I had trusted ya and I thought that you had far greater insights than us but now I am not sure...Sir, I have no ill-will towards you but I just want to know, you have gone silent after this comment and one another about GPT 5.3 instant as far as I can see. You did say in the first that you will go out on a limb with public comment, so please don't mind me if I ask questions in public about that commentThe question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
Sir, I have no ill-will towards you but I just want to know, you have gone silent after this comment and one another about GPT 5.3 instant as far as I can see. You did say in the first that you will go out on a limb with public comment, so please don't mind me if I ask questions in public about that commentThe question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
The question is: But what now? Do you see now why you should quit?That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
That being said, I still respect you ted for atleast trying to say it on a community, you had no reason to but took the risk. I genuinely hope that you realize that this question is coming from a place of concern. OpenAI employees like you , were also deceived by OpenAI/Sam altman itself, in a way even more so than us. You had no monetary reason I suppose to go ahead and say it but you did based on your understanding at that time. and I respect it because it shows to me that maybe just maybe OAI employees aren't driven by just money as people would like to point out.If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
If this is what an OAI employee is saying, weren't they deceived too? weren't they humiliated in public by being proven wrong, losing their accountability/trust within a community?The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
The comments just turn to well money speaks, I agree, but does money speak so much that you cannot hear your peers/own community?I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
I still believe on the fringe thought that OAI employees have some say in all of this. 98 employees (no of employees who signed notdivided.org) leaving have 1000 fold more magnitude than 98 people not using OAI. You have power, and with it comes responsibility.I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
I just want a discussion with OpenAI Employees in general / especially with those who signed NotDivided.org or who are part of this community of hackernews like ted. what do YOU guys make up of all the situation?A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
A lot of this situation if historians ever write about it, would feel so close to "I was just following orders" than not. No sadly this is not hyperbole now because what we are talking about is the creation of autonomous killing machines which can kill anyone without any human in the loop.People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
People from the future are also gonna ask us general public why we didn't held the people working accountable, in a similar fashion as to the past.Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
Once again, I still mean to bring no hate towards anyone. Make peace not war. I just want to think that the world would be a better place for my future children and generation and I would like to hope that this comment can be meaningful towards it.Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
Have a nice day as one can in a situation like this. A lot of the things I say or do is the same things I asked the people of past when reading history in my classes, Why didn't you guys do X or Y, Why didn't the public say anything. Why was it silent? But we are gonna be history too and someone is gonna ask us why were we silent and I just want to make the answer I tried rather than I don't know. I sort of wanted to learn something from history.Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
Sincerely, We (the public) want a discussion with OpenAI employees about it. Please don't be silent as silence will be interpreted by the future generations as agreement. Please speak. Tell us what you all are doingA lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
A lot of the times it feels like I am shouting in the void tho in these matters as these messages just straight up don't go to the right people and that feeling sucks because at some point, I am gonna get tired shouting in the void too.If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
If anyone also has contacts with OAI employees, please ask them such questions and share us the responses if possible. I just want some answers, that's all.[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
[0]: Ask HN: What will OpenAI employees do now who have signed notdividedorg petition: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47231498
reply
You mean other than Nuremberg which was focused on prosecuting war criminals? Remember, IBM was never held to account for propping up the Nazi war and genocide machine. People who made Zyklon B weren't either. Corporate governance is the instrumental convergence of our time.
reply
reply
Not the first time, not the last time, add it to the list of shit he's done that should put him in a little cell for the rest of his life.
reply
reply
I'm sure anthropic has signed up more revenue this week in response to this debacle to cover it. Where they're actually screwed is if the gov follows through and declare anthropic a supply chain risk.
reply
1. Stargate seemed to require a dedicated press conference by the President to achieve funding targets. Why risk that level of politicization if it didn't?2. Greg Brockman donated $25mil to Trump MAGA Super PAC last year. Why risk so much political backlash for a low leverage return of $200m on $25m spent?3. During WW2, military spend shot from 2% to 40% of GDP. The administration is requesting $1.5T military budget for FY2027, up from $0.8T for FY2025. They have made clear in the past 2 months that they plan to use it and are not stopping anytime soonIf you believe "software eats the world" it is reasonable to expect the share of total military spend to be captured by software companies to increase dramatically over the next decade. $100B (10% of capture) is a reasonable possibility for domestic military AI TAM in FY2027 if the spending increase is approved (so far, Republicans have not broken rank with the administration on any meaningful policy)If US military actions continue to accelerate, other countries will also ratchet up military spend - largely on nuclear arsenals and AI drones (France already announced increase of their arsenal). This further increases the addressable TAMGiven the competition and lack of moat in the consumer/enterprise markets, I am not sure that there is a viable path for OpenAI to cover it's losses and fund it's infrastructure ambitions without becoming the preferred AI vendor for a rapidly increasing military budget. The devices bet seems to be the most practical alternative, but there is far more competition both domestically (Apple, Google, Motorola) and globally (Xiaomi, Samsung, Huawei) than there is for military AIHaving run an unprofitable P&L for a decade, I can confidently state that a healthy balance sheet is the only way to maintain and defend one's core values and principles. As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learn - the road to hell (aka a heavily militarized world) is oft paved with the best intentions
2. Greg Brockman donated $25mil to Trump MAGA Super PAC last year. Why risk so much political backlash for a low leverage return of $200m on $25m spent?3. During WW2, military spend shot from 2% to 40% of GDP. The administration is requesting $1.5T military budget for FY2027, up from $0.8T for FY2025. They have made clear in the past 2 months that they plan to use it and are not stopping anytime soonIf you believe "software eats the world" it is reasonable to expect the share of total military spend to be captured by software companies to increase dramatically over the next decade. $100B (10% of capture) is a reasonable possibility for domestic military AI TAM in FY2027 if the spending increase is approved (so far, Republicans have not broken rank with the administration on any meaningful policy)If US military actions continue to accelerate, other countries will also ratchet up military spend - largely on nuclear arsenals and AI drones (France already announced increase of their arsenal). This further increases the addressable TAMGiven the competition and lack of moat in the consumer/enterprise markets, I am not sure that there is a viable path for OpenAI to cover it's losses and fund it's infrastructure ambitions without becoming the preferred AI vendor for a rapidly increasing military budget. The devices bet seems to be the most practical alternative, but there is far more competition both domestically (Apple, Google, Motorola) and globally (Xiaomi, Samsung, Huawei) than there is for military AIHaving run an unprofitable P&L for a decade, I can confidently state that a healthy balance sheet is the only way to maintain and defend one's core values and principles. As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learn - the road to hell (aka a heavily militarized world) is oft paved with the best intentions
3. During WW2, military spend shot from 2% to 40% of GDP. The administration is requesting $1.5T military budget for FY2027, up from $0.8T for FY2025. They have made clear in the past 2 months that they plan to use it and are not stopping anytime soonIf you believe "software eats the world" it is reasonable to expect the share of total military spend to be captured by software companies to increase dramatically over the next decade. $100B (10% of capture) is a reasonable possibility for domestic military AI TAM in FY2027 if the spending increase is approved (so far, Republicans have not broken rank with the administration on any meaningful policy)If US military actions continue to accelerate, other countries will also ratchet up military spend - largely on nuclear arsenals and AI drones (France already announced increase of their arsenal). This further increases the addressable TAMGiven the competition and lack of moat in the consumer/enterprise markets, I am not sure that there is a viable path for OpenAI to cover it's losses and fund it's infrastructure ambitions without becoming the preferred AI vendor for a rapidly increasing military budget. The devices bet seems to be the most practical alternative, but there is far more competition both domestically (Apple, Google, Motorola) and globally (Xiaomi, Samsung, Huawei) than there is for military AIHaving run an unprofitable P&L for a decade, I can confidently state that a healthy balance sheet is the only way to maintain and defend one's core values and principles. As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learn - the road to hell (aka a heavily militarized world) is oft paved with the best intentions
If you believe "software eats the world" it is reasonable to expect the share of total military spend to be captured by software companies to increase dramatically over the next decade. $100B (10% of capture) is a reasonable possibility for domestic military AI TAM in FY2027 if the spending increase is approved (so far, Republicans have not broken rank with the administration on any meaningful policy)If US military actions continue to accelerate, other countries will also ratchet up military spend - largely on nuclear arsenals and AI drones (France already announced increase of their arsenal). This further increases the addressable TAMGiven the competition and lack of moat in the consumer/enterprise markets, I am not sure that there is a viable path for OpenAI to cover it's losses and fund it's infrastructure ambitions without becoming the preferred AI vendor for a rapidly increasing military budget. The devices bet seems to be the most practical alternative, but there is far more competition both domestically (Apple, Google, Motorola) and globally (Xiaomi, Samsung, Huawei) than there is for military AIHaving run an unprofitable P&L for a decade, I can confidently state that a healthy balance sheet is the only way to maintain and defend one's core values and principles. As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learn - the road to hell (aka a heavily militarized world) is oft paved with the best intentions
If US military actions continue to accelerate, other countries will also ratchet up military spend - largely on nuclear arsenals and AI drones (France already announced increase of their arsenal). This further increases the addressable TAMGiven the competition and lack of moat in the consumer/enterprise markets, I am not sure that there is a viable path for OpenAI to cover it's losses and fund it's infrastructure ambitions without becoming the preferred AI vendor for a rapidly increasing military budget. The devices bet seems to be the most practical alternative, but there is far more competition both domestically (Apple, Google, Motorola) and globally (Xiaomi, Samsung, Huawei) than there is for military AIHaving run an unprofitable P&L for a decade, I can confidently state that a healthy balance sheet is the only way to maintain and defend one's core values and principles. As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learn - the road to hell (aka a heavily militarized world) is oft paved with the best intentions
Given the competition and lack of moat in the consumer/enterprise markets, I am not sure that there is a viable path for OpenAI to cover it's losses and fund it's infrastructure ambitions without becoming the preferred AI vendor for a rapidly increasing military budget. The devices bet seems to be the most practical alternative, but there is far more competition both domestically (Apple, Google, Motorola) and globally (Xiaomi, Samsung, Huawei) than there is for military AIHaving run an unprofitable P&L for a decade, I can confidently state that a healthy balance sheet is the only way to maintain and defend one's core values and principles. As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learn - the road to hell (aka a heavily militarized world) is oft paved with the best intentions
Having run an unprofitable P&L for a decade, I can confidently state that a healthy balance sheet is the only way to maintain and defend one's core values and principles. As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learn - the road to hell (aka a heavily militarized world) is oft paved with the best intentions
reply
> As the "alignment" folks on the AI industry are likely to learnI will push back here. Dario & co are not starry-eyed naive idealists as implied. This is a calculated decision to maximize their goal (safe AGI/ASI.)You have the right philosophy on the balance sheet side of things, but what you're missing is that researchers are more valuable than any military spend or any datacenter.It does not matter how many hundreds of billions you have - if the 500-1000 top researchers don't want to work for you, you're fucked; and if they do, you will win because these are the people that come up with the step-change improvements in capability.There is no substitute for sheer IQ:- You can't buy it (god knows Zuck has tried, and failed to earn their respect).- You can't build it (yet.)- And collaboration amongst less intelligent people does not reliably achieve the requisite "Eureka" realizations.Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
I will push back here. Dario & co are not starry-eyed naive idealists as implied. This is a calculated decision to maximize their goal (safe AGI/ASI.)You have the right philosophy on the balance sheet side of things, but what you're missing is that researchers are more valuable than any military spend or any datacenter.It does not matter how many hundreds of billions you have - if the 500-1000 top researchers don't want to work for you, you're fucked; and if they do, you will win because these are the people that come up with the step-change improvements in capability.There is no substitute for sheer IQ:- You can't buy it (god knows Zuck has tried, and failed to earn their respect).- You can't build it (yet.)- And collaboration amongst less intelligent people does not reliably achieve the requisite "Eureka" realizations.Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
You have the right philosophy on the balance sheet side of things, but what you're missing is that researchers are more valuable than any military spend or any datacenter.It does not matter how many hundreds of billions you have - if the 500-1000 top researchers don't want to work for you, you're fucked; and if they do, you will win because these are the people that come up with the step-change improvements in capability.There is no substitute for sheer IQ:- You can't buy it (god knows Zuck has tried, and failed to earn their respect).- You can't build it (yet.)- And collaboration amongst less intelligent people does not reliably achieve the requisite "Eureka" realizations.Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
It does not matter how many hundreds of billions you have - if the 500-1000 top researchers don't want to work for you, you're fucked; and if they do, you will win because these are the people that come up with the step-change improvements in capability.There is no substitute for sheer IQ:- You can't buy it (god knows Zuck has tried, and failed to earn their respect).- You can't build it (yet.)- And collaboration amongst less intelligent people does not reliably achieve the requisite "Eureka" realizations.Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
There is no substitute for sheer IQ:- You can't buy it (god knows Zuck has tried, and failed to earn their respect).- You can't build it (yet.)- And collaboration amongst less intelligent people does not reliably achieve the requisite "Eureka" realizations.Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
- You can't buy it (god knows Zuck has tried, and failed to earn their respect).- You can't build it (yet.)- And collaboration amongst less intelligent people does not reliably achieve the requisite "Eureka" realizations.Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
- You can't build it (yet.)- And collaboration amongst less intelligent people does not reliably achieve the requisite "Eureka" realizations.Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
- And collaboration amongst less intelligent people does not reliably achieve the requisite "Eureka" realizations.Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
Had Anthropic gone forth with the DoD contract, they would have lost this top crowd, crippling the firm. On the other hand, by rejecting the contract, Anthropic's recruiting just got much easier (and OAI's much harder).Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth. Yes, there's a lot of money, but very few highly intelligent people want to work for them. (Almost no top talent wants to work for Palantir, despite the pay.) So, naturally:- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
- If OpenAI becomes a glorified military contractor, they will bleed talent.- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
- Top talent's low trust in the government means Manhattan Project-style collaborations are dead in the water.As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
As such, AGI will likely emerge from a private enterprise effort that is not heavily militarized.Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
Finally, the Anthropic restrictions will last, what, 2.5 more years? They are being locked out of a narrow subset of usecases (DoD contract work only - vendors can still use it for all other work - Hegseth's reading of SCR is incorrect) and have farmed massive reputation gains for both top talent and the next administration.
reply
I don't know the answers to these questions, but if the answer is “yes” to at least 1 or 2, then I think the equation flips quite a bit. This is what I'm seeing in the world right now, and it's disconcerting:1. Ukraine and Russia have been in a skirmish that has been drawn out much longer than I would guess most people would have guessed. This has created a divide in political allegiance within the United States and Europe.2. We captured the leader of Venezuela. Cuba is now scared they are next.3. We just bombed Iran and killed their supreme leader.4. China and the US are, of course, in a massive economic race for world power supremacy. The tensions have been steadily rising, and they are now feeling the pressure of oil exports from Iran grinding to a halt.5. The past couple days Macron has been trying to quell tension between Israel and Lebanon.I really do not hope we are not headed into war. I hope the fact that we all have nukes and rely on each others' supply chains deters one. But man does it feel like the odds are increasing in favor of one, and man does that seem to throw a wrench in this whole thing with Anthropic vs. OpenAI.
1. Ukraine and Russia have been in a skirmish that has been drawn out much longer than I would guess most people would have guessed. This has created a divide in political allegiance within the United States and Europe.2. We captured the leader of Venezuela. Cuba is now scared they are next.3. We just bombed Iran and killed their supreme leader.4. China and the US are, of course, in a massive economic race for world power supremacy. The tensions have been steadily rising, and they are now feeling the pressure of oil exports from Iran grinding to a halt.5. The past couple days Macron has been trying to quell tension between Israel and Lebanon.I really do not hope we are not headed into war. I hope the fact that we all have nukes and rely on each others' supply chains deters one. But man does it feel like the odds are increasing in favor of one, and man does that seem to throw a wrench in this whole thing with Anthropic vs. OpenAI.
2. We captured the leader of Venezuela. Cuba is now scared they are next.3. We just bombed Iran and killed their supreme leader.4. China and the US are, of course, in a massive economic race for world power supremacy. The tensions have been steadily rising, and they are now feeling the pressure of oil exports from Iran grinding to a halt.5. The past couple days Macron has been trying to quell tension between Israel and Lebanon.I really do not hope we are not headed into war. I hope the fact that we all have nukes and rely on each others' supply chains deters one. But man does it feel like the odds are increasing in favor of one, and man does that seem to throw a wrench in this whole thing with Anthropic vs. OpenAI.
3. We just bombed Iran and killed their supreme leader.4. China and the US are, of course, in a massive economic race for world power supremacy. The tensions have been steadily rising, and they are now feeling the pressure of oil exports from Iran grinding to a halt.5. The past couple days Macron has been trying to quell tension between Israel and Lebanon.I really do not hope we are not headed into war. I hope the fact that we all have nukes and rely on each others' supply chains deters one. But man does it feel like the odds are increasing in favor of one, and man does that seem to throw a wrench in this whole thing with Anthropic vs. OpenAI.
4. China and the US are, of course, in a massive economic race for world power supremacy. The tensions have been steadily rising, and they are now feeling the pressure of oil exports from Iran grinding to a halt.5. The past couple days Macron has been trying to quell tension between Israel and Lebanon.I really do not hope we are not headed into war. I hope the fact that we all have nukes and rely on each others' supply chains deters one. But man does it feel like the odds are increasing in favor of one, and man does that seem to throw a wrench in this whole thing with Anthropic vs. OpenAI.
5. The past couple days Macron has been trying to quell tension between Israel and Lebanon.I really do not hope we are not headed into war. I hope the fact that we all have nukes and rely on each others' supply chains deters one. But man does it feel like the odds are increasing in favor of one, and man does that seem to throw a wrench in this whole thing with Anthropic vs. OpenAI.
I really do not hope we are not headed into war. I hope the fact that we all have nukes and rely on each others' supply chains deters one. But man does it feel like the odds are increasing in favor of one, and man does that seem to throw a wrench in this whole thing with Anthropic vs. OpenAI.
reply
Being accurate, by all reporting Israel killed Iran's leadership.Yes, likely enabled by US intelligence, but the one who pulls the trigger does matter.
Yes, likely enabled by US intelligence, but the one who pulls the trigger does matter.
reply
The one who pulled the trigger is irrelevant here, because both have pulled the trigger hundreds or thousands of times in the past few days, dividing up targets between them for the joint operation.
reply
I'm aware that internet forums like to play fast and loose with insinuations, but facts are facts.
reply
It sounds like you think this means something?Obviously it doesn't when we're talking about an administration that openly breaks laws, much less EOs, and issues whatever EOs they want saying whatever they want, even in violation of previous EOs. There aren't even any repercussions to the president "violating an EO".So, the pedantry here is irrelevant. The two parties are on the same team, working towards the same goal, doing the same things, divvying up the list of targets to strike.
Obviously it doesn't when we're talking about an administration that openly breaks laws, much less EOs, and issues whatever EOs they want saying whatever they want, even in violation of previous EOs. There aren't even any repercussions to the president "violating an EO".So, the pedantry here is irrelevant. The two parties are on the same team, working towards the same goal, doing the same things, divvying up the list of targets to strike.
So, the pedantry here is irrelevant. The two parties are on the same team, working towards the same goal, doing the same things, divvying up the list of targets to strike.
reply
If you'd rather talk with yourself, I'll see myself out of this convo. No time for folks who would rather indulge in hyperbole than messy reality.
reply
But! That's not who you always have to be! I'm confident you can coherently articulate your point without resorting to that. Feel free to come back if you're willing to share why you feel the president not complying with a presidential executive order is significant here, rather than insignificant.Anyways, happy friday!
Anyways, happy friday!
reply
reminder that trump has been flirting with just continuing in power (2028 hats and talks about a third term) and is responsible for trying a coup last time he lost.personally I think there's a possibility where he'll just declare martial law and stay in power at the end of his term.
personally I think there's a possibility where he'll just declare martial law and stay in power at the end of his term.
reply
This is a massive cope imo. The reason that the AI industry is so incestuous is just because there are only a handful of frontier labs with the compute/capital to run large training clusters.Most of the improvements that we've seen in the past 3 years are due to significantly better hardware and software, just boring and straightforward engineering work, not brilliant model architecture improvements. We are running transformers from 2017. The brilliant researchers at the frontier labs have not produced a successor architecture in nearly a decade of trying. That's not what winning on research looks like.Have there been some step-change improvements? Sure. But by far the biggest improvement can be attributed to training bigger models on more badass hardware, and hardware availability to serve it cheaply. To act like the DoD isn't going to be able to stand up pytorch or vllm and get a decent result is hilarious: the reason you use slurm and MPI and openshmem is because national labs and DoD were using it first. NCCL is just gpu accelerated scope-reduced MPI. nvshmem is just gpu accelerated scope-reduced openshmem.If anything, DoD doesn't have the inference throughput requirements that the unicorns have and might just be able to immediately outperform them by training a massive dense model without optimizing for time to first token or throughput. They don't have to worry about if the $/1M tokens makes it economically feasible to serve, which is a primary consideration of the unicorns today when they're choosing their parameter counts. They can just rate limit the endpoint and share it, with a 2 hour queue time.The government invented HPC, it's their world and you're just playing in it.> Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth./eyeroll but nobody can do what you do!
Most of the improvements that we've seen in the past 3 years are due to significantly better hardware and software, just boring and straightforward engineering work, not brilliant model architecture improvements. We are running transformers from 2017. The brilliant researchers at the frontier labs have not produced a successor architecture in nearly a decade of trying. That's not what winning on research looks like.Have there been some step-change improvements? Sure. But by far the biggest improvement can be attributed to training bigger models on more badass hardware, and hardware availability to serve it cheaply. To act like the DoD isn't going to be able to stand up pytorch or vllm and get a decent result is hilarious: the reason you use slurm and MPI and openshmem is because national labs and DoD were using it first. NCCL is just gpu accelerated scope-reduced MPI. nvshmem is just gpu accelerated scope-reduced openshmem.If anything, DoD doesn't have the inference throughput requirements that the unicorns have and might just be able to immediately outperform them by training a massive dense model without optimizing for time to first token or throughput. They don't have to worry about if the $/1M tokens makes it economically feasible to serve, which is a primary consideration of the unicorns today when they're choosing their parameter counts. They can just rate limit the endpoint and share it, with a 2 hour queue time.The government invented HPC, it's their world and you're just playing in it.> Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth./eyeroll but nobody can do what you do!
Have there been some step-change improvements? Sure. But by far the biggest improvement can be attributed to training bigger models on more badass hardware, and hardware availability to serve it cheaply. To act like the DoD isn't going to be able to stand up pytorch or vllm and get a decent result is hilarious: the reason you use slurm and MPI and openshmem is because national labs and DoD were using it first. NCCL is just gpu accelerated scope-reduced MPI. nvshmem is just gpu accelerated scope-reduced openshmem.If anything, DoD doesn't have the inference throughput requirements that the unicorns have and might just be able to immediately outperform them by training a massive dense model without optimizing for time to first token or throughput. They don't have to worry about if the $/1M tokens makes it economically feasible to serve, which is a primary consideration of the unicorns today when they're choosing their parameter counts. They can just rate limit the endpoint and share it, with a 2 hour queue time.The government invented HPC, it's their world and you're just playing in it.> Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth./eyeroll but nobody can do what you do!
If anything, DoD doesn't have the inference throughput requirements that the unicorns have and might just be able to immediately outperform them by training a massive dense model without optimizing for time to first token or throughput. They don't have to worry about if the $/1M tokens makes it economically feasible to serve, which is a primary consideration of the unicorns today when they're choosing their parameter counts. They can just rate limit the endpoint and share it, with a 2 hour queue time.The government invented HPC, it's their world and you're just playing in it.> Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth./eyeroll but nobody can do what you do!
The government invented HPC, it's their world and you're just playing in it.> Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth./eyeroll but nobody can do what you do!
> Generally, the defense crowd have a somewhat inflated sense of self worth./eyeroll but nobody can do what you do!
/eyeroll but nobody can do what you do!
reply
The dense model argument is self-defeating long term. Sparsity (MoE etc.) lets you build a smarter model at the same compute budget, so going dense because you can afford to waste FLOPs is how you fall behind b/c you never came up with the step function improvements needed.Sure, the DoD invented HPC, but it also invented the internet, and then the private sector made it actually useful.
Sure, the DoD invented HPC, but it also invented the internet, and then the private sector made it actually useful.
reply
So yeah, they bet a whole lot on “look at us, we have morals”.
reply
reply
Also, they got a huge PR win, and jumped to #1 on the Apple App Store. Consumer market share is going to decide which of the AI companies is the market leader, not fickle government contracts.
reply
If you look at what generates cash, it's corp to corp. That's across most industries. While there are markets that are consumer mostly, LLMs have immense and enormous business facing revenue potential. The consumer market is a gnat in comparison.
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
As opposed to all those famous ethical battles where there's nothing in it for you to do the wrong thing?
reply
reply
Not a chance. The DoD has massive pockers which and INCREDIBLY SPREAD OUT. You can't underestimate how spread this money is. The DoD has maybe a 64 GPU cluster and ALMOST NO ONE USES IT FOR DEEP MODEL TRAINING. Even contractors end up working with DGX boxes to do all their training.As of 2023, I was doing the largest Deep learning training runs out of anyone I have known in the industry and I've been in the industry for 20 yeras. The second best groups behind mine were using 4 GPU locally machines that they had to purchase on contract.There's no way the DoD can train these models themselves, not even close. They are COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON INDUSTRY. I was the PM for a DARPA program in 2023 and SAME PROBLEM. They had no compute or would rely on university compute if a program had a university partner. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW FAR BEHIND THE DOD IS IN THIS SPACE.
As of 2023, I was doing the largest Deep learning training runs out of anyone I have known in the industry and I've been in the industry for 20 yeras. The second best groups behind mine were using 4 GPU locally machines that they had to purchase on contract.There's no way the DoD can train these models themselves, not even close. They are COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON INDUSTRY. I was the PM for a DARPA program in 2023 and SAME PROBLEM. They had no compute or would rely on university compute if a program had a university partner. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW FAR BEHIND THE DOD IS IN THIS SPACE.
There's no way the DoD can train these models themselves, not even close. They are COMPLETELY DEPENDENT ON INDUSTRY. I was the PM for a DARPA program in 2023 and SAME PROBLEM. They had no compute or would rely on university compute if a program had a university partner. YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW FAR BEHIND THE DOD IS IN THIS SPACE.
reply
reply
reply
I want to be very clear on the messaging that is coming from OpenAl, and the mendacious nature of it. This is an example of who they really are, and I want to make sure everything [sic] sees it for what it is. Although there is a lot we don't know about the contruct they signed with DoW [shorthand for the Department of Defense] (and that maybe they don't even know as well — it could be highly unclear), we do know the following:Sam [Altman]'s description and the DoW description give the strong impression (although we would have to see the actual contract to be certain) that how their contruct works is that the model is made available without any legal restrictions ("all lawful use") but that there is a "safety layer", which I think amounts to model refusals, that prevents the model from completing certain tasks or engaging in certain applications."Safety layer" could also mean something that partners such as Palantir [Anthropic's business partner for serving U.S. agency customers] tried to offer us during these negotiations, which is that they on their end offered us some kind of classifier or machine learning system, or software layer; that claims to allow some applications and not others. There is also some suggestion of OpenAT employees ("FDE>" [shorthand for forward deployed engineers]) looking over the usage of the model to prevent had applications.Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy. are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safery theater: The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass survelllance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonorous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data it is analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).We also know — those in safeguards know painfulty well — that refusals aren't reliable and jailbreaks are common, often as easy as just misinforming the model about the data it is analyzing. An important distinction here that makes it much harder than the safeguards probiem is that while it's relatively easy to, for example, determine if a model is being used to conduct cyberattacks from inputs und outputs, it's very hard to determine the nature and context of the cyber attacks, which is the kind of distinction needed here. Depending on the details this task can be difficult or impossible.The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse: our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide”.Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAl employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP [acceptable use policy] of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAl's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI [shorthand for OpenAl] is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAf accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simuitaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAl and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.[1] https://gcdnb.pbrd.co/images/4Qlmsorrytlk.jpg
Sam [Altman]'s description and the DoW description give the strong impression (although we would have to see the actual contract to be certain) that how their contruct works is that the model is made available without any legal restrictions ("all lawful use") but that there is a "safety layer", which I think amounts to model refusals, that prevents the model from completing certain tasks or engaging in certain applications."Safety layer" could also mean something that partners such as Palantir [Anthropic's business partner for serving U.S. agency customers] tried to offer us during these negotiations, which is that they on their end offered us some kind of classifier or machine learning system, or software layer; that claims to allow some applications and not others. There is also some suggestion of OpenAT employees ("FDE>" [shorthand for forward deployed engineers]) looking over the usage of the model to prevent had applications.Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy. are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safery theater: The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass survelllance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonorous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data it is analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).We also know — those in safeguards know painfulty well — that refusals aren't reliable and jailbreaks are common, often as easy as just misinforming the model about the data it is analyzing. An important distinction here that makes it much harder than the safeguards probiem is that while it's relatively easy to, for example, determine if a model is being used to conduct cyberattacks from inputs und outputs, it's very hard to determine the nature and context of the cyber attacks, which is the kind of distinction needed here. Depending on the details this task can be difficult or impossible.The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse: our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide”.Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAl employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP [acceptable use policy] of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAl's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI [shorthand for OpenAl] is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAf accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simuitaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAl and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
"Safety layer" could also mean something that partners such as Palantir [Anthropic's business partner for serving U.S. agency customers] tried to offer us during these negotiations, which is that they on their end offered us some kind of classifier or machine learning system, or software layer; that claims to allow some applications and not others. There is also some suggestion of OpenAT employees ("FDE>" [shorthand for forward deployed engineers]) looking over the usage of the model to prevent had applications.Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy. are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safery theater: The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass survelllance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonorous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data it is analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).We also know — those in safeguards know painfulty well — that refusals aren't reliable and jailbreaks are common, often as easy as just misinforming the model about the data it is analyzing. An important distinction here that makes it much harder than the safeguards probiem is that while it's relatively easy to, for example, determine if a model is being used to conduct cyberattacks from inputs und outputs, it's very hard to determine the nature and context of the cyber attacks, which is the kind of distinction needed here. Depending on the details this task can be difficult or impossible.The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse: our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide”.Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAl employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP [acceptable use policy] of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAl's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI [shorthand for OpenAl] is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAf accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simuitaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAl and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Our general sense is that these kinds of approaches, while they don't have zero efficacy. are, in the context of military applications, maybe 20% real and 80% safery theater: The basic issue is that whether a model is conducting applications like mass survelllance or fully autonomous weapons depends substantially on wider context: a model doesn't "know" if there's a human in the loop in the broad situation it is in (for autonorous weapons), and doesn't know the provenance of the data it is analyzing (so doesn't know if this is US domestic data vs foreign, doesn't know if it's enterprise data given by customers with consent or data bought in sketchier ways, etc).We also know — those in safeguards know painfulty well — that refusals aren't reliable and jailbreaks are common, often as easy as just misinforming the model about the data it is analyzing. An important distinction here that makes it much harder than the safeguards probiem is that while it's relatively easy to, for example, determine if a model is being used to conduct cyberattacks from inputs und outputs, it's very hard to determine the nature and context of the cyber attacks, which is the kind of distinction needed here. Depending on the details this task can be difficult or impossible.The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse: our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide”.Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAl employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP [acceptable use policy] of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAl's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI [shorthand for OpenAl] is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAf accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simuitaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAl and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
We also know — those in safeguards know painfulty well — that refusals aren't reliable and jailbreaks are common, often as easy as just misinforming the model about the data it is analyzing. An important distinction here that makes it much harder than the safeguards probiem is that while it's relatively easy to, for example, determine if a model is being used to conduct cyberattacks from inputs und outputs, it's very hard to determine the nature and context of the cyber attacks, which is the kind of distinction needed here. Depending on the details this task can be difficult or impossible.The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse: our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide”.Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAl employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP [acceptable use policy] of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAl's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI [shorthand for OpenAl] is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAf accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simuitaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAl and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
The kind of "safety layer" stuff that Palantir offered us (and presumably offered OpenAI) is even worse: our sense was that it was almost entirely safety theater, and that Palantir assumed that our problem was "you have some unhappy employees, you need to offer them something that placates them or makes what is happening invisible to them, and that's the service we provide”.Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAl employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP [acceptable use policy] of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAl's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI [shorthand for OpenAl] is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAf accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simuitaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAl and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Finally, the idea of having Anthropic/OpenAl employees monitor the deployments is something that came up in discussion within Anthropic a few months ago when we were expanding our classified AUP [acceptable use policy] of our own accord. We were very clear that this is possible only in a small fraction of cases, that we will do it as much as we can, but that it's not a safeguard people should rely on and isn't easy to do in the classified world. We do, by the way, try to do this as much as possible, there's no difference between our approach and OpenAl's approach here.So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI [shorthand for OpenAl] is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAf accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simuitaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAl and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
So overall what I'm saying here is that the approaches OAI [shorthand for OpenAl] is taking mostly do not work: the main reason OAf accepted them and we did not is that they cared about placating employees, and we actually cared about preventing abuses. They don't have zero efficacy, and we're doing many of them as well, but they are nowhere near sufficient for purpose. It is simuitaneously the case that the DoW did not treat OpenAl and us the same here.We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
We actually attempted to include some of the same safeguards as OAI in our contract, in addition to the AUP which we considered the more important thing, and DoW rejected them with us. We have evidence of this in the email chain of the contract negotiations (I'm writing this with a lot to do, but I might get someone to follow up with the actual language). Thus, it is false that "OpenAl's terms were offered to us and we rejected them", at the same time that it is also false that OpenAls terms meaningfully protect them against domestic mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons.Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Finally, there is some suggestion in Sam/OpenAl's language that the red lines we are talking about, fully autonomous weapons and domestic mass surveillance, are already illegal and so an AUP about these is unnecessary. This mirrors and seems coordinated with DoW's messaging. It is however completely false. As we explained in our statement yesterday, the DoW does have domestic surveillance authorities, that are not of great concern in a pre-Al world but take on a diferent meaning in a post-Al world.For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
For example, it is legal for DoW to buy a bunch of private data on US citizens from vendors who have obtained that data in some legal way (often involving hidden consents to sell to third parties) and then analyze it at scale with AI to build profiles of citizens, their loyalties, movement patterns in physical space (the data they can get includes GPS data, etc), and much more.Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Notably, near the end of the negotiation the DoW offered to accept our current terms if we deleted a specific phrase about "analysis of bulk acquired data", which was the single line in the contract that exactly matched this scenario we were most worried about. We found that very suspicious. On autonomous weapons, the DoW claims that "human in the loop is the law", but they are incorrect. It is currently Pentagon policy (set during the Biden admin[istration]) that a human has to be in the loop of firing a weapon. But that policy can be changed unilaterally by Pete Hegseth, which is exactly what we are worried about. So it is not, for all intents and purposes, a real constraint.A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
A lot of OpenAI and DoW messaging just straight up lies about these issues or tries to confuse them.I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
I think these facts suggest a pattern of behavior that I've seen often from Sam Altman, and that I want to make sure people are equipped to recognize:He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
He started out this morning by saying he shares Anthropte's redlines, in order to appear to support us, get some of the credit, and not be attacked when they take over the contract. He aiso presented himself as someone who wants to "set the same contract for everyone in the industry" — e.g. he's presenting himself as a peacemaker and dealmaker.Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Behind the scenes, he's working with the DoW to sign a contract with them, to replace us the instant we are designated a supply chain risk. But he has to do this in a way that doesn't make it seem like he gave up on the red lines and sold out when we wouldn't. He is able to superficially appear to do this, because (1) he can sign up for all the safety theater that Anthropic rejected, and that the DoW and partners are willing to collude in presenting as compelling to his employees, und (2) the DoW is also willing to accept some terms from him that they were not willing to accept from us. Both of these things make it possible for OAI to get a deal when we could not.The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
The real reasons DoW and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven't donated to Trump (while OpenAl/Greg [Brockman, OpenAl's president] have donated a lot), we haven't given dictator-style praise to Trump (while Sam has), we have supported AI regulation which is against their agende, we've told the truth about a number of Al policy issues (like job displacement), and we've actually held our red lines with integrity rather than colluding with them to produce "safety theater" for the benefit of employees (which, I absolutely swear to you, is what literally everyone at DoW, Palanti, our political consultants, etc, assumed was the problem we were trying to solve).Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Sam is now (with the help of DoW) trying to spin this as we were unreasonable, we didn't engage in a good way, we were less flexible, etc. I want people to recognize this as the gaslighting it is.Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Vague justifications like "person X was hard to work with" are often used to hide real reasons that look really bad, like the reasons I gave above about political donations, political loyalty, and safety theater. It's important that everyone understand this and push back on this narrative at least in private, when talking to OpenAI employees.Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Thus, Sam is trying to undermine our position while appearing to support it. I want people to be really clear on this: he is trying to make it more possible for the admin to punish us by undercutting our public support. Finally, I suspect he is even egging them on, though I have no direct evidence for this last thing.I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
I think this attempted spin/gaslighting is not working very well on the general public or the media, where people mostly see OpenAl's deal with DoW as sketchy or suspicious, and see us as the heroes (we're #2 in the App Store now!). [Anthropic's Claude chatbot later rose to no. 1 on one of Apple's App Store download rankings.] It is working on some Twitter morons, which doesn't matter, but my main worry is how to make sure it doesn't work on OpenAl employees.Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
Due to selection effects, they're sort of a gullible bunch, but it seems important to push back on these narratives which Sam is peddling to his employees.
[1] https://gcdnb.pbrd.co/images/4Qlmsorrytlk.jpg
reply
If youve spent even a small amount of time with llms you'll know that these security measures are just window dressing.
reply
It's a standard security practice to randomly generate usernames and so my name is like that. Account is 8 years old.I asked as I was not clear about what Dario meant.
I asked as I was not clear about what Dario meant.
reply
reply
i.e. he worries that OpenAI employees could also be gaslighted by Altman
reply
anthropic has the least attrition rateand yesterday an openai employee left already and joined anthropic
and yesterday an openai employee left already and joined anthropic
reply
I know most of you here dont quite have the imagination to see it. But feel free to screenshot my post and lets talk in a year ;)
reply
openai is best fit for usa's interests. sam is smart enough to be politically flexible and keep his mouth shut on closing doors of opportunities.musk's views are best fit for world's interests but he's really spread thin and xai still sub par compared to openai, anthropic, google. he's also play safe lately trying to be politically neutral after his stint with the republicans.im rooting for anthropic given their product excellence but it pains me that the other side of it is the effective altruism, the politics of dems, so on.
musk's views are best fit for world's interests but he's really spread thin and xai still sub par compared to openai, anthropic, google. he's also play safe lately trying to be politically neutral after his stint with the republicans.im rooting for anthropic given their product excellence but it pains me that the other side of it is the effective altruism, the politics of dems, so on.
im rooting for anthropic given their product excellence but it pains me that the other side of it is the effective altruism, the politics of dems, so on.
reply
reply
Anthropic might not sign up with DoD but they definitely still live in a glass house.Also, its extremely evident that we live in a post truth world. The accusation of Lies dont hold any teeth anymore. Especially in the post law gov of America
Also, its extremely evident that we live in a post truth world. The accusation of Lies dont hold any teeth anymore. Especially in the post law gov of America
reply
reply
Source: https://www.ft.com/content/97bda2ef-fc06-40b3-a867-f61a711b1...
reply
reply
reply
reply
reply
Just because you hate Altman doesn't mean everyone else does! Most people just know him as the guy who makes ChatGPT which most people like.EDIT: Also, it doesn't help to brag about how this is good actually because now they are getting app downloads! People sympathize with victims of unfair situations. They don't like seeing people take advantage of those unfair situations though. No one has ever found the welfare recipient bragging about their welfare to be sympathetic.
EDIT: Also, it doesn't help to brag about how this is good actually because now they are getting app downloads! People sympathize with victims of unfair situations. They don't like seeing people take advantage of those unfair situations though. No one has ever found the welfare recipient bragging about their welfare to be sympathetic.
reply
Which is intended to muddy the waters about Anthropic's actual position vs OpenAI's, and portray himself as a conciliator (for the audience of DoD/Trump) who is still bound by equally strong ethics (as a fig leaf for OpenAI's employees sympathetic to Anthropic). All to swoop in a land a big contract from the same people he is making a show of “supporting” in public.I'd be pretty pissed too, tbh. Like, should he instead be thanking Sam effusively for being a manipulative slimeball acting entirely within his own self interest?If as he says Sam's comments are actually damaging Anthropic's credibility/bargaining position with his public commentary then trying to change the popular narrative about what OpenAI/Sam are doing is a reasonable tactic.As for your welfare analogy I'm kinda struggling to understand how to map that onto the participants in the current scenario or the lesson intended to be implied by it.
I'd be pretty pissed too, tbh. Like, should he instead be thanking Sam effusively for being a manipulative slimeball acting entirely within his own self interest?If as he says Sam's comments are actually damaging Anthropic's credibility/bargaining position with his public commentary then trying to change the popular narrative about what OpenAI/Sam are doing is a reasonable tactic.As for your welfare analogy I'm kinda struggling to understand how to map that onto the participants in the current scenario or the lesson intended to be implied by it.
If as he says Sam's comments are actually damaging Anthropic's credibility/bargaining position with his public commentary then trying to change the popular narrative about what OpenAI/Sam are doing is a reasonable tactic.As for your welfare analogy I'm kinda struggling to understand how to map that onto the participants in the current scenario or the lesson intended to be implied by it.
As for your welfare analogy I'm kinda struggling to understand how to map that onto the participants in the current scenario or the lesson intended to be implied by it.
reply
Going "what he's saying is straight up lies" is no more evidence backed than Altman claiming he asked the DoD to have Anthropic given the same deal as OAI and have the SCR designation avoided.
reply
You don't give habitual liars the benefit of doubt.
reply
reply
Just because you hate Altman doesn't mean everyone else does! Most people just know him as the guy who makes ChatGPT which most people like.
reply
But of course we could live in different bubbles
reply
reply
What happens here matters everywhere
by Todd Bishop on Mar 5, 2026 at 6:20 pmMarch 6, 2026 at 8:59 am
OpenAI officially opened its new engineering office in downtown Bellevue, Wash., on Thursday, unveiling a retro-modern, wood-paneled space for its 250 employees in the region — with enough room in the tower to ultimately accommodate as many as 1,400 people.
It's already the ChatGPT and Codex maker's biggest office outside its San Francisco headquarters, and a sign of the AI industry's impact on the Seattle area.
“This is a monumental day for OpenAI and Bellevue,” said Vijaye Raji, OpenAI's CTO of applications, as he cut the ceremonial ribbon with Bellevue Mayor Mo Malakoutian.
The office puts OpenAI within close proximity of two of its biggest investors and partners: Microsoft in nearby Redmond and Amazon in Bellevue and Seattle. The opening comes less than a week after Amazon announced a $50 billion investment in the company.
It marks the latest milestone in OpenAI's rapid expansion. The company first arrived in Bellevue in 2024, seeking to tap the region's engineering talent pool. Last month, OpenAI scaled up, signing a lease to boost its footprint to nearly 300,000 square feet in City Center Plaza.
OpenAI currently occupies two floors with the ability to add 10 more as it grows.
The Bellevue office includes teams working on infrastructure, ChatGPT, research, and advertising, in addition to partnerships, an early sign of its expansion beyond engineering.
Statsig, the Bellevue startup Raji founded in 2021, forms the nucleus of the new office. OpenAI acquired the company for $1.1 billion last year, bringing Raji aboard as a key technical leader.
The space is built around a sweeping wood-clad central staircase connecting its two current floors, and lounge-like common areas designed for informal gatherings, including a library (yes, there are a few books) and a game room. Those were deliberate choices to encourage the kinds of connections that remote work can't replicate, Raji said in an interview at the event.
Malakoutian, the Bellevue mayor, called the opening “a vote of confidence” in the city, which has specifically courted AI companies as part of a broader economic development push.
In a recent interview with GeekWire, Malakoutian said companies are drawn to predictable permitting, modern infrastructure, and quality of life, offering a competitive edge in recruiting. A light rail line connecting the Eastside to Seattle across Lake Washington opens this month.
Elon Musk's xAI is creating an engineering center a short walk away. Cloud and AI infrastructure company Crusoe opened a Bellevue office last year. Companies including Snap, Anduril, Shopify, Snowflake, Uber, and Databricks have signed new or expanded leases in the city.
Patrick Bannon, president and CEO of the Bellevue Downtown Association, called the OpenAI expansion “a tremendous investment” in downtown, and said the growth of AI companies further diversifies the city's business landscape, adding to existing anchors such as Amazon and gaming giants Valve and Bungie.
“This is a wonderful complementary growth of our employment base,” he said.
Gov. Bob Ferguson, appearing via recorded video, noted that the region ranks among the top in the country for AI talent, saying it's “very well-positioned to become a global hub for AI.”
Matt McIlwain, managing director at Madrona Venture Group, which was an early investor in Statsig, called the new office an example of a “virtuous cycle” of local founders building startups that attract larger employers. He credited Raji for pushing to build a critical mass for OpenAI in Bellevue, which has been “more on its front foot” than Seattle in courting tech companies.
But given ongoing tax debates in the state, in which McIlwain and others in the tech community have been vocal, he questioned whether lawmakers appreciate the dynamic.
“The folks in Olympia clearly do not understand that flywheel,” he said.
For Raji, the opening is the latest chapter in a larger story. The region has been his home for 23 years, starting when Microsoft recruited him to the area. He later joined Facebook's Seattle office and helped it grow locally from a handful of employees to 5,000 as its regional leader.
In that way, the OpenAI expansion is part of a familiar pattern.
“You can see the sequence,” Raji said, crediting the region's talent pool and growth. “So it's only natural that now, with all the AI investments, this area is again back in the center.”
Subscribe to GeekWire's free newsletters to catch every headline
Have a scoop that you'd like GeekWire to cover? Let us know.
OpenAI acquires Statsig for $1.1B, names CEO to key role in surprise exit for Seattle-area unicorn
OpenAI inks huge lease in Bellevue, doubling down on Seattle region near Microsoft and Amazon HQs
Is 5 days in the office key to startup success? OpenAI's big Statsig acquisition is a proof point
OpenAI deepens Seattle-area footprint with blockbuster $1.1B acquisition of Statsig
Catch every headline in your inbox
What happens here matters everywhere
GeekWire chronicles the Pacific Northwest startup scene. Sign up for our weekly startup newsletter, and check out the GeekWire funding tracker and VC directory.
by Taylor Soper on Mar 5, 2026 at 4:03 pmMarch 5, 2026 at 4:03 pm
The AI moment is not just another tech cycle — it's one of the best openings founders have seen in years.
That was the message from Sudheesh Nair, a longtime Bay Area tech leader and co-founder of enterprise web agent startup TinyFish, speaking Thursday at a Seattle Enterprise AI Summit event hosted by OneSixOne.
“There is no better time to start companies than now,” he said. “It's just magical.”
He believes the AI boom could produce the same kind of lasting infrastructure and category-defining companies that came out of earlier economic and technology shifts. Nair said this wave may be as significant as the internet, and possibly even bigger, because “for the first time, reasoning can be on tap.”
He added: “The way I think of it is, completely be constrained by your imagination — but nothing else.”
Nair previously helped scale Nutanix and ThoughtSpot. In 2024 he launched TinyFish, which raised $47 million last year to build infrastructure for AI agents to operate across the web. “I couldn't stand on the sidelines,” he said.
He likened today's moment to a gold rush, noting that most of the enduring outcomes from 1849 were second‑order products and infrastructure: durable jeans, safer elevators, modern banking systems. He said these were built not for the gold rush, but because of the gold rush.
Nair pushed back on the instinct to wait for clarity in a fast‑moving market where even frontier AI labs are still figuring out how their models behave. “No one who knows what the heck is happening,” he said.
But Nair also was careful not to romanticize startups. He said company-building is not for everyone, and noted that some people are better suited to join startups or build inside larger organizations. His broader point was that the tools, the pace of change, and the raw opportunity around AI have created a rare moment for people willing make the startup leap.
“If you just happen to have a pickaxe and shovel, the best thing might be to just jump in,” Nair said.
Track all of GeekWire's in-depth startup coverage: Sign up for the weekly startup email newsletter; check out the funding tracker and VC directory; and follow our startup news headlines.
Subscribe to GeekWire's free newsletters to catch every headline
Have a scoop that you'd like GeekWire to cover? Let us know.
Startup radar: Electric trailers, audio detection, onboarding agents, construction communication
The ‘triangle' model that Madrona's Matt McIlwain uses to assess founders and startup pitches
Seattle VCs: Startups must rethink defensibility in the fast-moving AI era
Inside Founders Bash: 10 takeaways from our conversations with startup leaders in Seattle
Catch every headline in your inbox
A machine-learning model developed by Weill Cornell Medicine investigators may provide clinicians with an early warning of a complication that can occur late in pregnancy.
Preeclampsia is a sudden onset condition that involves high blood pressure prior to delivery. It affects about 2% to 8% of pregnancies worldwide and can have serious consequences for both parent and child. A new study, published March 6 in JAMA Network Open, describes a machine-learning-based computer model that provides continually updated predictions of preeclampsia risk based on electronic health record data recorded late in pregnancy. The study was co-led by Dr. Fei Wang, associate dean for AI and data science and the Frances and John L. Loeb Professor of Medical Informatics in Department of Population Health Sciences at Weill Cornell Medicine, and Dr. Zhen Zhao, professor of clinical pathology and laboratory medicine at Weill Cornell Medicine and central laboratory director at NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center. Clinical expertise in obstetrics was provided by Dr. Tracy Grossman, assistant professor of clinical obstetrics and gynecology at Weill Cornell Medicine and a maternal-fetal medicine specialist at NewYork-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital.
Existing models that assess preeclampsia risk during the first trimester are primarily used as early warnings, allowing clinicians to prescribe aspirin as a preventive medication early in the pregnancy and provide additional monitoring throughout at-risk pregnancies. While these approaches may reduce the risk of early-onset preeclampsia, their predictive accuracy is limited for late-onset and term cases, which account for the majority of preeclampsia diagnoses. As a result, few tools are available to help predict short-term preeclampsia risk during the last trimester of pregnancy when most cases arise. To fill this gap, co-first authors Dr. Haoyang Li, a postdoctoral associate in population health sciences, and Dr. Yaxin Li, a postdoctoral associate in pathology and laboratory medicine, worked with Drs. Wang, Zhao and Grossman to develop and test a preeclampsia modeling tool using deidentified electronic health record data on almost 59,000 pregnancies at three NewYork-Presbyterian hospitals. The team created the model using data on 35,895 pregnancies of patients who delivered at NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center between October 2020 and May 2025. The model most accurately predicted the likelihood of preeclampsia around 34 weeks, potentially giving clinicians time to take preventive measures.
The team then validated their model using data from 8,664 pregnancies at NewYork-Presbyterian Lower Manhattan Hospital and 14,280 at NewYork-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital. The model showed the pregnant patient's blood pressure was the strongest predictor of preeclampsia. However, early in the third trimester, abnormal results from routine testing of the patient's blood may also suggest potential risk. These laboratory results may suggest that emerging problems with the placenta, which provides nutrients and oxygen to the fetus, could be contributing to preeclampsia at this stage. Later in the third trimester, the patient's age and white blood cell count became more important indicators, suggesting inflammation may be playing a role at this time.
The model may help clinicians identify patients in the third trimester of pregnancy most likely to develop preeclampsia and provide them additional lead time to take timely clinical action, including enhanced monitoring, blood pressure management, and decisions around delivery timing. Unlike earlier approaches that provide a single, static risk estimate, this model continuously updates preeclampsia risk with current electronic health record data as pregnancy progresses, aligning prediction with real-world clinical decision-making in late pregnancy. More study is needed to determine if preeclampsia at different stages of the third trimester has distinct causes, like placental dysfunction or systemic inflammation. But if those patterns are confirmed, they may help clinicians develop more targeted preeclampsia interventions that address the root causes.
Weill Cornell Medicine
Li, H., et al. (2026). Machine Learning for Dynamic and Short-Term Prediction of Preeclampsia Using Routine Clinical Data. JAMA Network Open. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.0359. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2845997
Posted in: Device / Technology News | Women's Health News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
In the 1970s, the contraceptive pill was the most frequently used method of contraception in Western countries; in Germany, for example, one in three women used "the pill." It is safe and reliable, covered by (most) health insurances, and - particularly in the 1960s and 1970s - was also regarded as an instrument of female self-determination.
Over time, however, a number of side effects associated with hormonal contraceptive methods became apparent, from nausea, weight gain, and breast tenderness to more serious risks such as high blood pressure, liver dysfunction, and thrombosis. Some medications, such as certain antibiotics or St. John's wort products, can reduce the effectiveness of the pill.The pill is increasingly rejectedAlthough side effects occur comparatively rarely, concerns about the risks have contributed to a declining acceptance of the pill. According to recent surveys by the German Federal Centre for Health Education, since 2023 fewer women and couples have been using the pill for contraception; among younger adults in particular, the condom has replaced the pill as the number one contraceptive method.A research team led by Dr. Claudia Tredup and Prof. Stefan Knapp from the Institute of Pharmaceutical Chemistry at Goethe University Frankfurt, Prof. Daniel Merk from Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and Prof. Hubert Schorle from UKB, who is also a member of the Transdisciplinary Research Area (TRA) "Life & Health" at the University of Bonn, and Prof. Jean-Pierre Allam, Head of Andrology at UKB, is now working to develop contraceptives with particularly few side effects that do not rely on hormonal mechanisms. To this end, they have launched the PREVENT project ("Precision Reproductive and Contraceptive Target Discovery Network") and secured three years of project funding from the German Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space.Active substances for new contraceptive strategiesPREVENT project leader Dr. Claudia Tredup from the Institute of Pharmaceutical Chemistry at Goethe University Frankfurt explains: "Hormonal contraceptive methods such as the contraceptive pill interfere with the body's natural hormone cycle. In PREVENT, we are investigating for alternative non-hormonal approaches for both women and men in order to offer couples additional contraceptive options."The PREVENT team's research approach focuses on so-called small molecules that specifically block proteins found exclusively in sperm or egg cells. For example, small molecules could specifically target sperm, preventing sperm from reaching the egg cell. Tredup explains: "Since contraceptives are administered to healthy individuals, they must not only be reliable and reversible, but also safe and highly tolerable."Given these complex requirements, the search for suitable active substances is highly demanding. The PREVENT team will therefore develop a drug discovery platform to establish technologies and tools for validating non-hormonal contraceptive concepts. Highly selective and effective compounds - so-called "chemical probes" - will enable the targeted testing of new contraceptive strategies and provide a solid foundation for preclinical and later clinical development.Biochemist Tredup adds: "We already know of a number of genes associated with infertility. Within the PREVENT team, we want to build the expertise needed to use the corresponding proteins as target structures for safe, non-hormonal contraceptive strategies." She is convinced that this is not just a classic pharmaceutical research project: "With PREVENT, we are also addressing key societal goals of reproductive self-determination and global health policy."
Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main
Posted in: Drug Discovery & Pharmaceuticals | Medical Science News | Medical Research News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
The Buck Institute for Research on Aging today announced the launch of Healthspan Horizons, a new initiative designed to address one of the most urgent challenges in modern medicine: how to measure, understand, and extend healthspan-the years of life spent in good health.
People are living longer-but too many of those added years are spent managing chronic disease. In other words, healthspan-the years of life lived in good health-hasn't kept pace. A growing body of evidence suggests that many aspects of healthy aging are changeable-and consequential for people, healthcare systems, and economies. What has been missing is the infrastructure to measure it coherently, compute it responsibly, and act on it collectively.
Healthspan Horizons is building a new kind of healthspan research infrastructure: a platform that links multi-modal, real-world data from people's everyday engagement with trusted wellness partners-like wearables, sleep, activity, nutrition, and labs-with periodic deep discovery measurements led by the Buck. The goal is to create uniquely powerful, long-term datasets that reveal what actually drives human healthspan over time-and to use responsible AI and the science of aging to turn those signals into interpretable healthspan trajectories and earlier signals of disease prevention.
Dense longitudinal datasets matter because their value compounds: when many different signals are measured on the same person over time, the data becomes exponentially more informative. That density makes it possible to detect subtle patterns, understand resilience, and identify early divergence from healthy aging-well before a sudden, life-ending, or life-debilitating disease takes hold.
Healthspan Horizons will support participation through partner programs and Buck-led studies, enabling individuals, wellness companies, and health systems to contribute longitudinal data under clear permissions and ethical governance. In return, participants gain access to a shared discovery engine: insights that emerge only when diverse data streams are responsibly linked over time-helping validate what works, identify earlier signals of decline, and benchmark outcomes across populations. Over time, the platform aims to translate these discoveries into clearer guidance on what helps people stay resilient-supporting more years of energy, strength, and independence.
Used responsibly, AI-grounded in Buck's deep biology of aging-can integrate complex, multi-modal signals into interpretable healthspan trajectories, unlocking more years of energy, function, and independence. But that future is only possible if we can responsibly connect the right kinds of data at scale. Healthspan Horizons exists to make that integration possible-and to help democratize the benefits of healthspan science for all.
Healthspan Horizons at the Buck Institute responds to this gap by reframing how healthspan science is organized. Instead of forcing data into a single silo, Healthspan Horizons enables partners to collaborate and learn together while keeping data stewardship where it belongs. Through a federated, privacy-preserving approach, approved analyses can run across partner environments-without requiring ownership or commercialization of individuals' health data.
The science of aging has matured to the point where extending healthy life is within reach. What we need now is the infrastructure to organize and apply that knowledge responsibly. Healthspan Horizons positions the Buck to help lead that next chapter-making healthspan measurable, trustworthy, and accessible to all."
Eric Verdin, President and CEO, Buck Institute of Research on Aging
"Most of us don't just want a longer life-we want more years of energy, strength, and independence," said Nathan Price, PhD, Professor, Buck Institute for Research on Aging; Co-Founder, Healthspan Horizons. "What's been missing is a way to bring together deep, long-term health data and apply rigorous AI to understand what truly drives healthy aging-responsibly, interoperably, and at scale. Healthspan Horizons is built to make that possible."
Healthspan Horizons is designed as an open, federated platform that links deep biological data, longitudinal outcomes, and real-world context. By aligning fragmented data ecosystems through shared standards, interpretable intelligence, and ethical governance, the initiative creates the conditions for healthspan to become a practical and trusted unit of value across research, care delivery, and policy.
The platform invites participation not simply as users, but as co-builders of a healthspan commons.
Healthspan Horizons is focused on defining and validating shared healthspan measures-turning multi-modal longitudinal data into computable trajectories and early-warning signals that partners can use for research and prevention.
Healthspan Horizons is driven by Buck Institute scientists and systems thinkers with decades of experience at the intersection of aging biology, data science, and translational research.
Led by Nathan Price, PhD, and Yi Sherry Zhang, PhD, this initiative launches with engagement from leaders across research, healthcare, philanthropy, and innovation ecosystems, including an advisory group spanning academic medicine, systems biology, precision health, and public health. Advisors include Larry Brilliant, MD, global public health leader and Co-Founder and CEO of Evity; Joel Dudley, PhD, biomedical AI entrepreneur, Co-Founder and CSO of Bevimi and former Chief Scientific Officer of Tempus; Kara Fitzgerald, ND, leading clinician–researcher advancing epigenetics and lifestyle medicine; Lee Hood, MD, PhD, pioneer of systems biology and CEO of Phenome Health; Shaista Malik, MD, MPH, Associate Vice Chancellor for Integrative Health at the University of California, Irvine and cardiologist specializing in preventive cardiology; Sara Szal, MD, functional medicine physician and New York Times bestselling author focused on precision longevity; and Eric Verdin, MD, President and CEO of the Buck Institute and internationally recognized geroscience leader.
"Medicine is shifting from reactive and episodic to predictive and preventive," said Lee Hood, MD, PhD, pioneer of systems biology and CEO of Phenome Health. "To make that transformation real, we must move beyond fragmented data silos toward shared, federated intelligence. Healthspan Horizons helps build the computational and ethical foundation needed to make healthspan measurable and actionable."
The future of healthspan will not be defined by any single dataset, institution, or technology. It will be shaped by how effectively societies choose to organize, govern, and apply scientific knowledge.
Healthspan Horizons exists to help make that future possible-by ensuring that healthspan becomes computable, trustworthy, and accessible, while remaining grounded in human dignity and collective benefit.
The full Healthspan Horizons White Paper, Bridging Wellness & Clinical Science: A Federated Healthspan Data Framework for the 21st-Century Longevity Economy, outlines the scientific, technical, and governance foundations of this effort and is available at healthspanhorizons.org/whitepaper. Researchers, clinicians, organizations, and individuals interested in participating are invited to learn more at healthspanhorizons.org/join.
Buck Institute for Research on Aging
Posted in: Medical Science News | Healthcare News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
The ambitious liver doctor would go just about anywhere in his home state to give people the hepatitis B vaccine.
Bill Cassidy offered jabs to thousands of inmates at Louisiana's maximum-security prison in the early 2000s. A decade before that, he set up vaccine clinics in middle schools, a model hailed nationally as a success.
"He got that whole generation immunized in East Baton Rouge," said Holley Galland, a retired doctor who worked with Cassidy vaccinating schoolchildren.
About the same time, a lawyer and environmental activist with a famous last name was starting to build the loyal anti-vaccine coalition that, two decades later, would move President Donald Trump to nominate him as the nation's top health official.
Today, a year after now-Sen. Cassidy warily cast the vote that ensured Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s ascension to that role, the Louisiana Republican's life's work - in medicine and in politics - is unraveling.
Newborn hepatitis B vaccination rates in the U.S. had plunged to 73% as of August, down 10 percentage points since a February 2023 high, according to research published in JAMA last month. In December, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices - remade by Kennedy - voted to revoke a two-decade-old recommendation that all newborns get the shot.
The next month, Trump endorsed U.S. Rep. Julia Letlow, a Cassidy challenger in what's shaping up to be a competitive Republican Senate primary. Letlow's foray into politics began in 2021 when she took the seat won by her husband, left vacant after he died from covid.
KFF Health News made multiple requests for comment from Cassidy over three months. His staff declined to make him available for an interview or provide comment. Letlow's campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
As the May primary nears, some Louisiana doctors are worried they've begun a long trek down a dark road when it comes to vaccine-preventable diseases.
Last year, on the day Kennedy was sworn in a thousand miles away in Washington, Louisiana's health department stopped promoting vaccines, halting its clinics and advertising. Its communications about an ongoing whooping cough outbreak in the state have nearly ceased. It took months for the state to announce last year that two infants had died from the illness. A Louisiana child's death from the flu was confirmed this January, and a couple of cases of measles were reported last year.
Spokespeople for the Louisiana Department of Health did not respond to questions.
"It's so hard to see children get sick from illnesses that they should have never gotten in the first place," said Mikki Bouquet, a pediatrician in Baton Rouge. "You want to just scream into the void of this community over how they failed this child."
As anti-vaccine forces have taken hold of the state and federal health departments, Cassidy has lamented the consequences.
"Families are getting sick and people are dying from vaccine-preventable deaths, and that tragedy needs to stop," he wrote on social media last fall.
But while it is Cassidy's duty as chairman of the Senate's Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee to conduct oversight of the health department, Kennedy has appeared before the committee just once since he was confirmed.
The secretary speaks at a "regular clip" with Cassidy, said Department of Health and Human Services spokesperson Andrew Nixon.
Kennedy's department has elevated Louisiana vaccine skeptics. The state surgeon general who terminated Louisiana's vaccine campaign, Ralph Abraham, was named deputy director of the CDC. (He left the role in February.) And Kennedy handpicked Evelyn Griffin, a Baton Rouge OB-GYN who later replaced Abraham as the state surgeon general, for an appointment to ACIP. Griffin has suggested the covid vaccine had dangerous side effects for young patients.
Research has shown that serious side effects from the vaccinations are rare and that the shots saved millions of lives during the pandemic.
Cassidy "has really not had an outspoken chorus of policy supporters" when it comes to inoculating people, said Michael Henderson, a professor of political communication at Louisiana State University. "There's not a lot of political stakes in doing that in Louisiana if you're a Republican."
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry reprimanded Cassidy after the senator called for the state's health department to ease access to covid shots.
"Why don't you just leave a prescription for the dangerous Covid shot at your district office and anyone can swing by and get one!" the Republican quipped on X in September.
On a sunny February afternoon, as Carnival floats were readied to parade the streets of New Orleans, pediatrician Katie Brown approached a basement apartment on a well-child visit. Cowboy boot pendants dangled from her ears, and a pack of diapers were clutched tightly in her arms.
The patient, a toddler who waved at the sight of visitors, was up to date on her immunizations. But when Brown suggested a covid vaccine, the girl's mother quickly declined, noting she had never gotten the shot either.
Many of Brown's young patients - seen through Nest Health, which offers in-home visits covered by Louisiana's Medicaid program - are current with their vaccines. Brown said home visits make parents more comfortable immunizing their children, but she's still spending more time these days explaining what they're getting in those shots.
"After covid vaccines, that's when some people just decided, 'I don't know if I trust vaccines, period,'" she said.
Across the state, vaccination rates have declined since the pandemic, falling short of the levels scientists say are required to achieve herd immunity for some deadly diseases, including measles. About 92% of Louisiana's kindergartners have had the recommended two doses of the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine.
The New Orleans Health Department has tried to step up with a $100,000 immunization campaign of its own, with clinics and billboards, during this year's flu season, said Jennifer Avegno, the department's director.
But the state's absence is felt. Other parishes across Louisiana have not taken similar action, leaving doctors largely on their own to promote immunizations.
"I'll say that with certainty," Avegno said. "It's been a blow to not have a statewide coordination."
A day after Brown's home visit, a mother in Baton Rouge shook her head when Bouquet offered a flu shot for her 10-year-old daughter in an exam room.
In the waiting room, parents could thumb through a handmade book that offers scientific facts to counter fears about vaccines. A laminated guide placed in each exam room explained the benefits of each recommended immunization.
Bouquet said she's experimenting with ways to educate parents about vaccines without seeming overbearing. She still hasn't figured out a surefire formula. Some parents now shut down any vaccine talk, and she worries others skip scheduling appointments to avoid the topic entirely.
"We're having to walk on eggshells a bit to determine how to get that trust back," Bouquet said. "And maybe these discussions can come up in future visits."
Children's Health Defense, the nonprofit that Kennedy helmed, worked to erode vaccine trust during the pandemic - falsely claiming, for instance, that covid shots cause organ damage and that polio vaccines were at fault for a rise in the disease. The organization also sued the federal government over the mRNA-based covid shots, hoping to get their emergency authorizations from the Food and Drug Administration revoked.
When Kennedy came before Cassidy's committee in January 2025 as Trump's nominee for health secretary, the senator-doctor saw risks if the prominent anti-vaccine lawyer was confirmed.
Cassidy described a time years ago when he loaded an 18-year-old onto a helicopter to get an emergency liver transplant. The young woman had acute hepatitis B, an incurable disease that is spread primarily through blood or bodily fluids and can lead to liver failure.
It was "the worst day of my medical career," he said, addressing Kennedy at the witness table in front of him. "Because I thought, $50 of vaccines could have prevented this all."
Cassidy started in politics in 2006 as a state senator, winning election to the U.S. House two years later. When he first ran for the U.S. Senate, in 2014, he charmed Louisiana voters with campaign ads showing him dressed in scrubs and a white lab coat, talking about his work with Hurricane Katrina evacuees and patients at Baton Rouge's public hospital.
But some Republicans soured on Cassidy after he voted to convict Trump on an article of impeachment charging him with inciting the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
The impeachment vote has hampered Cassidy's reelection bid this year in a state where Trump captured 60% of the vote in 2024.
"Cassidy has things that are associated with his name: the impeachment vote in 2021," Henderson said.
Cassidy's loyalty to Trump was tested again with Kennedy's nomination. Cassidy said he endorsed Kennedy after extracting pledges that he wouldn't tinker with the nation's vaccination program.
But since taking office, Kennedy has largely ignored those promises, and Cassidy hasn't publicly rebuked him.
Former Texas congressman Michael Burgess served for years with Cassidy in the House, where they were founding members of the GOP Doctors Caucus, started in 2009. He said Cassidy's discomfort with some of Kennedy's actions is palpable.
"You could hear some of the pain in Sen. Cassidy's voice when he was addressing that the secretary wanted to drop the birth dose of hepatitis B," Burgess said. "You got cases to nearly zero on hepatitis B. It was painful to him to think about taking this away from the population."
Retired Baton Rouge nurse practitioner Elizabeth Britton has switched her party affiliation so she can vote in the closed Republican primary for Cassidy, with whom she vaccinated inmates decades ago.
She doesn't quite understand the "mess" in Washington that resulted in the senator voting to confirm a vaccine critic.
Watching Kennedy and others promulgate doubts about shots she once administered has made her "profoundly sad" and "angry," she said, but most of all worried.
"It puts a pit in my stomach, because I know the consequences of people not getting the vaccine," she said.
KFF Health News
Posted in: Healthcare News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
Humans and animals share a remarkable capacity to sense when others are in distress and respond with comforting behavior. But the motivation for doing so, and why it sometimes breaks down, has been poorly understood.
UCLA Health researchers sought to better understand this in a new study published in Nature that uncovered the brain circuitry in mice linking two seemingly distinct social behaviors: caring for vulnerable offspring and comforting distressed peers. The findings provide the first direct neural evidence for a long-standing evolutionary hypothesis - that the biological drive to help others may have its origins in the ancient machinery of parental care.
Scientists have long speculated that prosocial behavior, the actions to help and console others, may have evolved from neural systems first developed to support care for helpless offspring. But until now, the specific brain circuits that might link these two behaviors had never been identified.
This study provides concrete neurobiological evidence for that evolutionary connection, and in doing so, offers a new framework for understanding the roots of empathy and social motivation - and why they can be disrupted in conditions such as depression, autism spectrum disorder, and other psychiatric conditions marked by social withdrawal.
The study established that animals that are better parents are also better helpers: mice that spent more time caring for pups also spent more time comforting stressed adult companions. This relationship was specific and did not reflect general sociability or other self-directed behavioral tendencies.
By monitoring neural activity, the researchers found that specific neurons in the medial preoptic area (MPOA) - a region known for its role in parenting - were activated when animals encountered stressed adults. They then showed that silencing neurons recruited during pup interactions caused animals to reduce helping behavior toward stressed adults, demonstrating a direct causal link between the circuits supporting parenting and prosocial behavior.
Finally, the team identified an MPOA pathway projecting to the brain's dopamine reward system that bidirectionally controls both behaviors. Both comforting and parenting triggered dopamine release in the nucleus accumbens, the brain's "reward center, suggesting that helping others is intrinsically rewarding - and that this reward is mediated by the same circuit that makes parental care motivating.
Together, these findings support the idea that evolution did not build prosocial behavior from scratch. Instead, the neural systems evolved for offspring care may have provided a scaffold for the emergence of broader prosocial support between adults. The MPOA, once thought of primarily as a parenting center, emerges from this study as a more general hub for other-directed care.
Future research aims to understand why some individuals are more prosocial than others. The researchers are also exploring whether disruption of this circuit contributes to the social deficits seen in animal models of neuropsychiatric disorders, and whether restoring its activity could offer a therapeutic target.
We show that the same circuits that enable animals to care for their offspring also drive helping and comforting behaviors toward distressed adults, highlighting a common neural basis that may shape empathy, cooperation, and the formation of supportive social communities."
Weizhe Hong, Study Senior Author and Professor, Departments of Neurobiology and Biological Chemistry, University of California - Los Angeles
University of California - Los Angeles
Sun, F., et al. (2026). Shared neural substrates of prosocial and parenting behaviours. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-026-10327-8. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10327-8.
Posted in: Medical Research News | Healthcare News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
Researchers at the National University of Singapore (NUS) have identified a protein called tyrosine phosphatase 1B (PTP1B) as a potential "switch" that can modulate a type of cancer cell death known as immunogenic cell death (ICD).
ICD is a special type of regulated cell death that activates the body's adaptive immune system against the dying cells. ICD-causing agents not only kill cancer cells directly but also help to develop long-term protection against them. This dual benefit has made ICD inducers and their drug mechanisms an increasingly important area of cancer research. While this has fuelled the search for these drugs in recent years, the specific molecular targets involved in ICD remained poorly understood.
A research team led by Professor ANG Wee Han from the NUS Department of Chemistry has discovered two platinum-containing compounds, namely Pt-NHC and PlatinER (Pt-ER), that can trigger ICD. In their research model study, tumour cells treated with these compounds were effective in helping to develop immunity protection against colorectal cancer. This work was carried out in collaboration with Associate Professor Maria BABAK from the City University of Hong Kong.
The research breakthrough was published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society on January 21st, 2026.
To understand how Pt-ER works inside cancer cells, the researchers designed several light-activated probes based on Pt-ER that could "tag" the proteins it attaches to. By combining advanced protein analytical methods and statistical analyses, the team identified PTP1B as a direct protein target linked to ICD.
The team showed that both Pt-ER and Pt-NHC directly bind to PTP1B and block its enzymatic activity, leading to ICD induction in cancer cells. Furthermore, they also found that interfering with PTP1B, either by switching off the gene or using other PTP1B-blocking compounds, could similarly increase ICD in cancer cells. The results also agreed with the analysis of public datasets, suggesting that PTP1B is involved in tumour growth and immune regulation in colorectal cancer.
Overall, the study revealed for the first time that PTP1B plays an important role in regulating ICD and may be a promising target for cancer chemoimmunotherapy.
The current study revealed the link between PTP1B and the immune-stimulating effects of our platinum-based ICD inducers. The next step is to understand how these molecules interact with PTP1B and trigger cell responses. Moving forward, we plan to follow up with a more detailed structural and molecular dynamics study of PlatinER with PTP1B."
Wee Han Ang, Professor, Department of Chemistry, National University of Singapore
National University of Singapore
Zou, J. X., et al. (2026). Organoplatinum(II) Type II Immunogenic Cell Death Inducers Target Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase 1B to Drive Immunogenicity. Journal of the American Chemical Society. DOI: 10.1021/jacs.5c18904. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jacs.5c18904.
Posted in: Medical Research News | Medical Condition News | Healthcare News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
In time for Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month in March, the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology has launched a new clinical study aimed at helping improve how patients with colorectal cancer share information about the genetic risks to their family members. Supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, the trial, "Family Communications After Genetic Testing," seeks to enroll about 4,000 colorectal cancer patients and their at-risk relatives across the United States.
Many people don't realize that colorectal cancer can run in families. In fact, about 30% of colorectal cancer cases are linked to genetics, and around 15% of newly diagnosed patients have a gene change (called a pathogenic germline variant) that increases cancer risk. Our study aims to improve communication between patients and families about the genetic risks of cancer in the hopes of catching or preventing colorectal cancers early when they are most easily treated."
Heather Hampel, M.S., CGC, study co-chair and genetic researche, City of Hope cancer center in Duarte, Calif.
When it comes to colorectal cancer, when one person in a family is found to have an inherited gene change, close relatives, including parents, children and siblings, may also carry the same gene. Knowing this can help families get earlier screening, take preventive steps, and catch cancer sooner when it's easier to treat. Unfortunately, many relatives never receive this important information.
This trial will compare two ways of sharing genetic test results with a patient's close relatives:
The goal is to learn which method helps more family members get the genetic testing they may need.
Through the study, researchers hope to learn:
The trial will be available to people diagnosed with colorectal cancer, stage I to IV, within the previous three months.
"Sharing genetic information can be stressful and confusing, especially right after a cancer diagnosis," said Frank Sinicrope, MD, study co-chair and a gastroenterologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. "Some patients aren't sure how to explain test results, while others worry about upsetting loved ones. This study hopes to identify a clear, helpful approach that makes it easier for families to understand their risks and take preventive action."
Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology
Posted in: Medical Research News | Medical Condition News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
During the COVID-19 pandemic, mental health specialists started using telemedicine much more frequently. Despite many benefits, a new study finds that virtual visits did not make it easier for psychiatrists, psychologists and therapists to reach significantly more people in areas where access to care has long been limited.
By analyzing Medicare billing records from providers practicing across the country, researchers from the Brown University School of Public Health, Harvard Medical School and McLean Hospital showed that greater use of telemedicine among mental health specialists did not substantially change whether they were seeing patients from rural or underserved areas.
According to data published in JAMA Network Open, mental health specialists who used telemedicine the most treated only slightly more patients from rural and underserved areas compared with specialists who used it far less.
"We had thought the dramatic shift from in-person care to telemedicine among mental health specialists would lead to them caring for substantially more patients in rural communities," said study author Drew Wilcock, a lead research scientist at Brown's School of Public Health. "Unfortunately, we just don't see it."
The team looked at Medicare billing records from 2018 to 2023 for 17,742 mental health specialists and grouped them into categories based on how much they used telemedicine to deliver care.
They found that compared with specialists who used telemedicine less, those who used telemedicine heavily only saw about 0.9 percentage points more rural patients, 0.1 percentage points more patients from areas that lack reliable access to mental health care providers, and 2.6 percentage points more patients located 20 miles or more from the provider. Researchers also found that those modest increases primarily reflected existing patients who moved to areas far from their providers and continued care via telemedicine.
The results also highlighted an unintended consequence of telemedicine use. Specialists using telemedicine more actually saw 3.6 percentage points fewer new patients overall. That finding suggests that while telemedicine may help specialists maintain long-term relationships with existing patients, it can reduce their capacity to take on new patients at the same time.
The researchers highlighted policy changes that could ensure telemedicine reaches the communities that need it most.
Currently, it is too administratively burdensome for a mental health physicians to get a license in many states. By changing how states license clinicians and making it easier for them to practice across state lines, this could help specialists reach more patients in rural communities."
Jacob Jorem, lead study author, Harvard Medical School
The researchers hope the findings prompt action from legislators and practitioners.
"The potential of telemedicine can't be ignored," said study author Ateev Mehrotra, a professor of health services, policy and practice at Brown. "But simply offering telemedicine will not address the barriers that many rural patients face in obtaining mental health care. For telemedicine's potential to be reached, we need policy interventions to address those barriers. Improving how we license physicians is a critical first step."
Brown University
Jorem, J., et al. (2026). Mental Health Specialist Telemedicine Uptake and Patient Location. JAMA Network Open. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2026.0823. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2845954
Posted in: Medical Research News | Medical Condition News | Healthcare News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
Findings from a study led by researchers at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (OSUCCC – James) support the potential of new therapies that could improve clinical outcomes for patients with squamous and adenocarcinoma non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC) that don't respond to immunotherapy.Reporting in the journal Science Translational Medicine, the researchers say their study provides strong evidence for the possible effectiveness of therapies that target both lysosomes – or particles in cells that help maintain cellular stability and nutrient availability – and a protein called SREBP-1 that increases glucose uptake and helps tumors resist current therapies that inhibit lysosomes.Corresponding and senior author for the study was Deliang Guo, PhD, founding director of the Center for Cancer Metabolism at the OSUCCC – James. Yaogang Zhong, PhD, a senior researcher in Guo's lab, was first author.
These fundings reveal a previously unrecognized mechanism by which tumors withstand lysosomal inhibition, providing a strong rationale for combination strategies targeting lysosomal function alongside glucose and lipid metabolism to more effectively treat NSCLC. This approach may also be applicable to other cancers with high metabolic demands for glucose and lipids that would present an even broader strategy for enhancing therapeutic outcomes."
Deliang Guo, PhD, founding director, Center for Cancer Metabolism, OSUCCC – James
The scientists say that functional lysosomes are critical for tumor growth, but multiple efforts to inhibit lysosomes in several cancer types with a drug called chloroquine (CQ) in combination with radiation, chemotherapy and targeted agents have yielded only modest or partial responses in clinical trials.This preclinical study, which involved cell lines and animal models, sought to learn how tumor cells evade lysosomal suppression, and also identify strategies for overcoming this resistance.Researchers also demonstrated that inhibiting glucose transport overcomes tumor resistance to CQ treatment by inducing mitochondrial damage, oxidative stress and tumor cell death."Our study is the first to reveal a previously unrecognized mode in which glucose and lipid metabolism are coupled to form a positive feedback regulatory loop," said Guo. "This finding deepens our understanding of the regulation of complex metabolic networks in biological systems and uncovers the metabolic compensatory flexibility of tumors, as well as their ability to evade inhibition of a single metabolic node."This study provides clear mechanistic guidance and a feasible drug-combination strategy to markedly enhance the antitumor efficacy of lysosomal inhibitors," said Zhong, adding that this work proposes that simultaneous targeting of lysosomal function and the glucose-lipid metabolic positive feedback loop represents an efficient antitumor strategy."This approach is particularly suitable for patients with lung squamous cell carcinoma and subsets of lung adenocarcinoma who lack actionable driver mutations and have limited treatment options," said Zhong.Notably, CQ and simvastatin are both clinically approved, repurposed drugs. The fatty acid synthesis inhibitor TVB-2640 has already entered phase II/III clinical trials, greatly accelerating the feasibility of clinical translation and the validation of this combination therapy strategy.Other study co-authors from Ohio State are Feng Geng, PhD; Huali Su, PhD; Logan Mazik; Na Li; Chengyao Chiang, PhD; Jeffrey Tonniges, PhD; Xiaoqui Mo, PhD; Amy Webb, PhD; Yongchen Guo, PhD; David Carbone, MD, PhD; Junran Zhang, MD, PhD; Arnab Chakravarti, MD; Qi-En Wang, PhD.
Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center
Zhong, Y., et al. (2026). SREBP-1 increases glucose uptake to promote tumor resistance to lysosome inhibition. Science Translational Medicine. DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.adx6873. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.adx6873
Posted in: Medical Science News | Medical Research News | Medical Condition News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
Improving the gap between your biological age and your chronological age is associated with a lower risk of stroke and improvements in signs of damage in the brain, according to a preliminary study released March 5, 2026, that will be presented at the American Academy of Neurology's 78th Annual Meeting taking place April 18-22, 2026, in Chicago and online.
The study does not prove that improving the age gap is the cause of brain health improvements; it only shows an association.
It's exciting to think that working to modify our biological age could be a pathway to preserving brain health. Lifestyle habits that support cardiovascular and metabolic health, like a healthy diet, regular exercise, adequate sleep and good blood pressure control, may help narrow the biological age gap, though we did not evaluate lifestyle programs in this study."
Cyprien Rivier, MD, MSc, study author of Yale University and member of the American Academy of Neurology
For the study, researchers analyzed the biological age of 258,169 people from a health care research database. They measured 18 biomarkers in the blood, such as cholesterol, average red blood cell volume and white blood cell count, to determine biological age at the start of the study and again six years later for a subset of participants. After an average of 10 years, researchers identified participants who had a stroke. A subset of participants also took tests of memory and thinking skills and had brain scans to look at signs of damage in the brain.
At the start of the study, participants had an average biological age of 54, compared to their actual age of 56. Six years later, they had an average biological age of 58, compared to their actual age of 62.
People with a biological age older than their chronological age had less favorable brain scans by the end of the study, as well as worse scores on the cognitive tests. They also had a 41% higher risk of stroke.
People who improved the gap between their biological and chronological ages between the start of the study and the repeat assessment were 23% less likely to have a stroke during the follow-up period.
Those with improvements also had a lower volume of white matter hyperintensities, which is a sign of damaged white matter tissue, by the end of the study than those who did not improve their biological age gaps. Their total volume of damage was 13% lower for each standard deviation in improvement.
These results took into account other factors that could affect the risk of stroke and brain damage, such as high blood pressure and other vascular conditions and socioeconomic factors.
"More research is needed, testing whether lowering people's biological age gap can be demonstrated to reduce the risk of stroke and later-life brain injury," Rivier said.
A limitation of the study was that while it found links, it was not designed to prove cause and effect. Also, only a smaller group had repeat blood tests, which limits what researchers could conclude about changes over time, particularly regarding cognitive tests.
The study was supported by the American Academy of Neurology/American Heart Association Ralph L. Sacco Scholarship in Brain Health, which was awarded to Rivier in 2024.
American Academy of Neurology
https://aanfiles.blob.core.windows.net/aanfiles/6d703d0e-b63c-4902-b862-98b6c72984bf/2026%20AAN%20Annual%20Meeting%20Abstract%20-%20Improvements%20in%20Biological%20Age%20Acceleration
Posted in: Medical Science News | Medical Research News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
A recent research study found that a combination of the GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide and bimagrumab, an antibody that blocks activin signaling pathways, results in greater weight loss while also preserving lean mass, such as skeletal muscle and connective tissue. In the paper "Bimagrumab and semaglutide alone or in combination for the treatment of obesity: a phase 2 randomized clinical trial," published Monday in the journal Nature Medicine, Dr. Steven Heymsfield of Pennington Biomedical Research Center describes the results of the BELIEVE study, which showed that the therapy combination addressed lean mass loss associated with GLP-1-based therapies.GLP-1-based therapies have been highly successful in reducing weight, but up to 40% of weight lost may come from lean mass. However, the study described in the paper indicates that the combination of semaglutide with bimagrumab delivered substantial weight loss over 72 weeks with lean mass preserved."Obesity treatment has traditionally focused on the number on a scale. Patients with obesity who are at risk for low muscle mass, affecting both physical and metabolic function, may benefit from treatments that maximize fat mass reduction while preserving skeletal muscle," said Heymsfield, who is an LSU Boyd Professor and director of the Metabolism and Body Composition Laboratory. "Bimagrumab and semaglutide work through distinct biological pathways, and when combined, we observed not only a preservation of lean mass but also an additive reduction in fat mass that exceeded what either therapy achieved alone."Study participants were divided into groups, with some receiving bimagrumab only, some receiving semaglutide only, and others receiving the combination. Participants receiving only bimagrumab saw an average weight loss of 10.8%, with all weight loss attributable to fat mass and lean mass increasing by 2.5%. Those receiving only semaglutide lost an average of 15.7% of body weight, with 71.8% of the loss from fat mass. Participants receiving the drug combination lost an average of 22.1% of body weight, with 92.8% of the weight loss composed of fat mass while lean mass was largely preserved.The double-blind, placebo-controlled study administered the drugs at two dosing levels for each – 10 or 30 mg/kg of bimagrumab and 1.0 or 2.4 mg of semaglutide – used alone or in combination. These various combinations and doses resulted in nine randomized groups. Bimagrumab doses were administered every 12 weeks while semaglutide doses were administered weekly.In addition to weight loss, participants demonstrated up to an 83% decrease in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), a key marker of inflammation linked to cardiovascular risk, and a substantial increase in adiponectin, a protein hormone that supports insulin sensitivity, fat metabolism and anti-inflammatory processes. In a subgroup of participants with indicators of prediabetes, some of the two-drug combination therapy groups had 100% reversion to normoglycemia among participants with prediabetes at baseline, essentially moving them to a nonprediabetes status.The drug combination was generally well tolerated, with side effects consistent with the known profiles of the individual drugs. The trial demonstrated positive results in terms of both lean mass retention and weight loss, but researchers recommend continued clinical development and refinement of the drug combination to better understand the common adverse events observed in the bimagrumab groups, such as mild-to-moderate acne and muscle spasms. The study also points to a need for researchers to shift focus from weight and body mass index to other measurements such as body composition as more informative indicators of optimal obesity management.Eli Lilly and Company funded the study, which was designed by Versanis Bio, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly and Company. Versanis Bio oversaw the clinical trial and partially funded the study before its acquisition by Lilly.
Pennington Biomedical Research Center
Heymsfield, S. B., et al. (2026). Bimagrumab plus semaglutide alone or in combination for the treatment of obesity: a randomized phase 2 trial. Nature Medicine. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-026-04204-0. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-026-04204-0
Posted in: Drug Trial News | Medical Condition News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
Mayo Clinic researchers have identified a drug-and-supplement combination therapy that is capable of reducing the harmful effects of senescent cells – also known as "zombie cells" – in diabetic kidney disease. In eBioMedicine, a publication of The Lancet, the team reported that the combination of the cancer drug dasatanib and a naturally occurring substance known as quercetin decreased inflammation and boosted protective factors in the kidney.
Diabetic kidney disease affects more than 12 million people in the U.S. and is the leading cause of kidney failure. While newer treatments can delay loss of kidney function, there is currently no cure.
Our study found that the combination therapy, given over a short period of time, reduced the abundance of senescent cells in a preclinical model of diabetic kidney disease and also improved kidney function."
LaTonya Hickson, M.D., nephrologist at Mayo Clinic in Florida and principal investigator of the study
To extend the health of the kidney, researchers have been interested in addressing the presence of senescent cells, which fail to undergo the natural death process and linger in tissues, contributing to aging and disease. The treatment approach involves senolytics, natural and designed substances that together selectively target senescent cells.
In a previously conducted, pilot clinical trial, Dr. Hickson and Mayo Clinic researchers found that the combination of dasatanib and quercetin reduced senescent cells in skin and fat tissues in patients with diabetic kidney disease. However, the effect of the combination therapy on senescence and protective factors in the diabetic kidney had not yet been described.
"It was important to prove that this one-time, short-course treatment has an effect on the kidneys, and we wanted to do so without invasive procedures in patients," says Xiaohui Bian, M.D., Ph.D., a nephrologist who conducted the work as a postdoctoral fellow at Mayo Clinic and is lead author on the study.
In a preclinical model of diabetic kidney disease, the team found that the combination therapy improved kidney function and protective factors while reducing injury, senescent cells, and inflammation. In cultured human kidney cells, the combination therapy also reduced the abundance of senescent cells and the inflammatory process they prompt.
"The results show this combination treatment holds potential to help reduce and halt kidney damage from diabetes," says Dr. Hickson. "Promising findings from these two investigations now suggest that larger scale studies using senolytics should be pursued in patients to improve kidney health."
Mayo Clinic
Bian, X., et al. (2026). Senolytics, dasatanib plus quercetin, reduce kidney inflammation, senescent cell abundance, and injury while restoring geroprotective factors in murine diabetic kidney disease. eBioMedicine. DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2026.106124. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/ebiom/article/PIIS2352-3964(26)00005-8/fulltext
Posted in: Medical Research News | Medical Condition News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) researchers have used a form of artificial intelligence (AI) to analyze anatomical changes in the brain and predict Alzheimer's disease with nearly 93% accuracy. Their research, published in the journal Neuroscience, also revealed that the anatomical changes, involving loss of brain volume, differ by age and sex.
Early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease can be difficult because symptoms can be mistaken for normal aging. We found that machine-learning technologies, however, can analyze large amounts of data from scans to identify subtle changes and accurately predict Alzheimer's disease and related cognitive states. This advance has informed Alzheimer's disease research and may lead to methods that could allow doctors to diagnose and treat the disease earlier and more effectively."
Benjamin Nephew, assistant research professor, Department of Biology and Biotechnology
Alzheimer's disease is a neurodegenerative disorder that impairs mental functions and ultimately leads to death. An estimated 6.9 million Americans age 65 and older are living with Alzheimer's disease.
Healthy brains contain billions of neurons, the cells that process and transmit signals needed for thought, movement, and other bodily functions. Alzheimer's disease injures neurons, leading to cell death and loss of brain tissue and associated cognitive functions.
Nephew, PhD student Senbao Lu, and Bhaavin Jogeshwar, MS '24, conducted their research with MRI scans of brains from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative, a multicenter project that built a library of brain scans from people age 69 to 84. The scans depict the brains of people with normal mental functioning, mild cognitive impairment, and Alzheimer's disease.
Analyzing data-rich MRI images can require substantial computing power and time. To focus their investigation, the WPI researchers first used machine learning to analyze 815 MRI scans for volume measurements in 95 brain regions. Then they deployed an algorithm to make predictions based upon differences in the measurements between healthy individuals and those with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease.
Results showed that the method was 92.87% accurate in detecting Alzheimer's disease among normal brains and brains of people with mild cognitive impairment.
Volume loss in the hippocampus, amygdala, and entorhinal cortex were top predictors of Alzheimer's disease across age and sex categories. The hippocampus is a small seahorse-shaped structure deep in the brain that is responsible for memory and learning. The amygdala, which is made up of two almond-shaped structures, controls emotions. The entorhinal cortex is a hub for memory, navigation, and perception, and it is among the first parts of the brain to be impacted by Alzheimer's disease.
Both males and females age 69 to 76, the youngest age group studied, showed loss of brain volume in the right hippocampus. The researchers say that suggests the right hippocampus may be important in early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease.
"The critical challenge in this research is to build a generalizable machine-learning model that captures the difference between healthy brains and brains from people with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease," Nephew says. "A generalizable model means that the biomarkers we found are not unique to this dataset but could be universal to all patients with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's."
Differences in male and female brains also emerged. The researchers discovered that volume loss in females occurred in the left middle temporal cortex, which is involved in language, memory, and visual perception. In males, volume loss was notable in the right entorhinal cortex.
The degree of these differences was surprising, Nephew says, and may be related to interactions between the progression of Alzheimer's disease and changes in sex hormones. Some researchers have connected the risk of Alzheimer's disease to the loss of estrogen in women and testosterone in men as they age.
Nephew and WPI students are following up on their Neuroscience publication by evaluating the use of deep leaning models and examining other factors that may impact the brain and Alzheimer's disease, such as diabetes. The research has attracted WPI students from disciplines ranging from biology and biotechnology to neuroscience, psychology, computer science, and bioinformatics.
"This research exemplifies the strength of neuroscience at WPI, which is interdisciplinary and computational," Nephew says. "The brain is an extremely complicated organ, and we need to think broadly about how to better understand, predict, and treat the diseases that afflict the brain."
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Jogeshwar, B. K., et al. (2025). Neuroanatomical-based machine learning prediction of Alzheimer's Disease across sex and age. Neuroscience. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2025.12.030. https://www.ibroneuroscience.org/article/S0306-4522(25)01177-7/fulltext
Posted in: Device / Technology News | Medical Condition News
Cancel reply to comment
Alexander Dulebo
Discover how Bruker is helping drive innovation in cosmetic science through advanced AFM techniques.
Gabi Saavedra
Discover how Thermo Fisher is shaping the future of plant-based foods through texture innovation and cultural relevance.
Dr. Lena Smirnova
Brain microphysiological systems are reshaping in vitro neurotoxicity testing through functional validation and advanced disease modeling.
News-Medical.Net provides this medical information service in accordance
with these terms and conditions.
Please note that medical information found
on this website is designed to support, not to replace the relationship
between patient and physician/doctor and the medical advice they may provide.
Last Updated: Friday 6 Mar 2026
News-Medical.net - An AZoNetwork Site
Owned and operated by AZoNetwork, © 2000-2026
Your AI Powered Scientific Assistant
Hi, I'm Azthena, you can trust me to find commercial scientific answers from News-Medical.net.
To start a conversation, please log into your AZoProfile account first, or create a new account.
Registered members can chat with Azthena, request quotations, download pdf's, brochures and subscribe to our related newsletter content.
A few things you need to know before we start. Please read and accept to continue.
Please check the box above to proceed.
Great. Ask your question.
Azthena may occasionally provide inaccurate responses.
Read the full terms.
Terms
While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena
answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses.
Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or
authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for
medical information you must always consult a medical
professional before acting on any information provided.
Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with
OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their
privacy principles.
Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential
information.
Read the full Terms & Conditions.
Provide Feedback
There are fewer than 100 days until the start of the 2026 World Cup in Canada, Mexico and the United States
World Cup co-hosts Mexico have announced plans to deploy nearly 100,000 security personnel to protect fans at this summer's tournament, amid the ongoing drug cartel violence in the country.
Mexico, hosts alongside the United States and Canada, will stage World Cup fixtures across three cities - including Guadalajara, the capital city of Jalisco where the violence began last month and more than 12,000 people are reported missing.
Mexico will also host matches in Mexico City and Monterrey, both spared by the violence, when the World Cup is held between 11 June and 19 July.
The Jalisco New Generation (CJNG) drug cartel, one of the country's most feared criminal organisations, has engaged in gun shootouts with the Mexican military, blocked roads and burned vehicles in response to the killing of its leader Nemesio Oseguera Cervantes - known as 'El Mencho' - in an army operation.
El Mencho was Mexico's most wanted man and was also sought by the United States, which had placed a $15m bounty on him.
He was buried on Monday in a cemetery near the military base in Zapopan. On Friday, Mexico president Claudia Sheinbaum presented her plan to ensure the safe staging of the World Cup.
Fifa and Sheinbaum have insisted that the violence will have no impact on the World Cup, when millions of visitors are expected.
Mexico's 'Plan Kukulkan', named after the serpent deity of the Mayan civilisation, covers the host cities and their nearby tourist destinations and will oversee a security deployment of "just over 99,000 personnel", according to the head of Mexico's World Cup coordination centre, Roman Villalvazo Barrios.
That figure includes 20,000 military personnel and 55,000 police officers, as well as members of private security companies, and involves around 2,500 military and civilian vehicles, 24 aircraft, anti-drone systems, and dogs trained to detect explosives and other substances.
Fifa president Gianni Infantino has said he feels "very reassured" that Mexico can still successfully stage World Cup games.
Follow your club with BBC Sport
Listen to the latest Football Daily podcast
Get football news sent straight to your phone
FA Cup: Watch live as Liverpool under way against Wolves in fifth round
Six Nations: Build-up as Ireland face Wales in Dublin
Who's to blame for Spurs crisis?
Jessie Buckley on The Bride! and Oscar nominated Hamnet
The Nations Pod Guide puts Rome in the centre
The Mitford sisters refuse to play by the rules
The highlights of Piano Room Month 2026 with Vernon Kay
Disillusionment and disbelief - thousands leave early with Spurs in freefall
'Howard Webb, where are you?' - How we can stop VAR ruining football
India reach T20 World Cup final as England fall short. VideoIndia reach T20 World Cup final as England fall short
Norris, Verstappen, Russell - and will it be any good? Key F1 storylines
How relegation could cost Spurs more than £250m
'Brave and brilliant, Russell has compelling case as Scotland's greatest'
McCullum wants to stay as England coach – will he get the chance?
How Old Firm cup tie could provide Premiership momentum
'Only one team tried to play' - Hurzeler criticises Arsenal
Meet GB's first female Paralympic snowboarder
Watershed moment as Russia's sporting exile ends
All you need to know about new F1 cars
Haaland? Kane? R9? Ranking the best centre-forwards this century
'I cheated head-injury assessment to play on in 2017 Lions Test'
'I knew the risks, I'd do it again' - Moody opens up in new BBC documentary
New era of Formula 1 - what is changing in 2026?
'There were tears - but I had to peek behind curtain of head injuries in rugby'
Iran, the US, and a World Cup that starts in three months
Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
If not listed, please contact your TV provider.
Happy Friday! The U.S. women's national team registered a significant victory in the SheBelieves Cup on Wednesday and look to follow that up on Saturday with another win, while the Serie A title race takes center stage in Europe as the two Milan teams square off. I'm Pardeep Cattry with an update to kickstart the weekend.
All times U.S./Eastern
Friday, March 6🇩🇪 Bundesliga: Bayern Munich vs. Borussia Monchengladbach, 2:30 p.m. ➡️ ESPN Select🇪🇸 LaLiga: Celta Vigo vs. Real Madrid, 3 p.m. ➡️ ESPN Select🏴 FA Cup: Wolverhampton Wanderers vs. Liverpool, 3 p.m. ➡️ ESPN Select
Saturday, March 7🌍 WWCQ: England vs. Iceland, 7:30 a.m. ➡️ CBS Sports Network🏴 FA Cup: Wrexham vs. Chelsea, 12:45 p.m. ➡️ ESPN Select🇮🇹 Serie A: Juventus vs. Pisa, 2:45 p.m. ➡️ Paramount+🇪🇸 LaLiga: Athletic Club vs. Barcelona, 3 p.m. ➡️ ESPN Select🏆 SheBelieves Cup: USWNT vs. Colombia, 3:30 p.m. ➡️ TBS🇺🇸 MLS: D.C. United vs. Inter Miami, 4:30 p.m. ➡️ Apple TV
Sunday, March 8🇮🇹 Serie A: AC Milan vs. Inter, 3:45 p.m. ➡️ Paramount+🇺🇸🇨🇦 MLS: FC Cincinnati vs. Toronto FC, 7 p.m. ➡️ Apple TV
☀️ Morning Footy (Weekdays 8-10 a.m.): Join Golazo Network as it helps fans get their day started on the right foot on the network's flagship morning show with highlights, interviews and the biggest soccer storylines. Morning Footy is also available in podcast form, so you'll never have to miss an episode.3️⃣ Attacking Third (Monday, Wednesday, Thursday): The leading women's soccer podcast and social brand is now a live studio show. The NWSL season is back and our coverage of the women's game is stronger than ever. Our analysts will be breaking down the USWNT, NWSL and European domestic season all year long. And don't miss Sunday live streams on YouTube as soon as the last NWSL game of the weekend ends.⚽ Call it What You Want (Tuesday and Thursday): Jimmy Conrad, Charlie Davies, and Tony Meola cover all things USMNT and the state of the game in the United States as the country prepares to co-host the 2026 World Cup. Catch new episodes live on the Golazo America YouTube channel every Tuesday and Thursday at 10 a.m. ET.
🥅 Scoreline (Daily): Scoreline is the newest place for fans to catch up on all the biggest news and results impacting global football, match highlights from the top soccer competitions and all the can't-miss goals from the day's action, starting Thursday and airing seven days a week.📺 How to watch: CBS Sports Golazo Network is a free 24/7 channel exclusively dedicated to offering unparalleled coverage of all the top soccer competitions worldwide. You can stream for free on the CBS Sports app, Pluto TV and Paramount+.
© 2026 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved.
The content on this site is for entertainment purposes only and CBS Sports makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the information given or the outcome of any game or event. Odds and lines subject to change. There is no gambling offered on this site. This site contains commercial content and CBS Sports may be compensated for the links provided on this site.
Images by Getty Images and Imagn
Explore GOAL Betting with
Real Madrid's decision to make a managerial change has come under heavy fire from club legend Ivan Helguera, who has publicly questioned the hierarchy's wisdom in dismissing Xabi Alonso. Speaking on the Bajo Palos podcast alongside Iker Casillas, the former Los Blancos midfielder suggested that the club moved far too quickly to terminate a promising project whilst gambling on Alvaro Arbeloa.
Helguera expressed a firm belief that Alonso deserved significantly more patience from the board, noting that despite some tactical reservations, the team possessed a solid foundation that should have been granted more time to flourish before the axe was swung by the club leadership. He argued that a fair evaluation of the squad's true potential under the former Bayer Leverkusen boss should have been reserved until much later in the season.
Helguera is adamant that the timeline for evaluating Alonso was unfairly short, suggesting the club panicked during a difficult run of form rather than trusting the long-term process. The Spaniard's tenure ended by mutual consent on January 12, just a day after a narrow 3–2 defeat to Barcelona in the Supercopa de España final, a stint also overshadowed by reported tactical disputes with Vinicius Junior.
Helguera said: “I think they should have waited until February or March to judge. By then, we would have seen how the team was really doing. They were too hasty in sacking Xabi Alonso."
The appointment of Arbeloa has also been met with scepticism, with Helguera pointing to a significant lack of experience at the highest level. He added: “It's absurd. Arbeloa had never coached in La Liga, and on the day he was promoted, he'd lost 4-1 with Castilla."
Add GOAL.com as a preferred source on Google to see more of our reporting
Helguera also took aim at Real's decision to snub club legend Raul, who spent six years as manager of the club's Castilla side after a glittering playing career at the Bernabeu. He added: “Raul would have handled this better because he's been captain and has lived through these situations. I don't think Arbeloa was the right guy."
Explore GOAL Betting with
World Cup broadcasters have been granted permission to cut away to show commercials during in-game hydration breaks this summer, sources told The Athletic's Henry Bushnell.
FIFA announced in December that that every World Cup match would feature three-minute breaks midway through each half as part of the organization's "commitment to player welfare."
Broadcasters have now been allowed two minutes and 10 seconds of this window to potentially show commercials, which can begin 20 seconds after the referee has blown his whistle to signal the hydration break, according to guidelines shared with Bushnell. The match feed must return more than 30 seconds before play resumes.
Broadcasters aren't obliged to flip to commercials, so they could instead use the time for in-studio analysis or just stick with the match feed. The latter could still involve advertisements on part of the screen, but these spots can only be sold to FIFA sponsors. The major global partners for the tournament include Saudi Arabia's state-owned oil and gas company Aramco and other companies long associated with major soccer events like Adidas, Coca-Cola, and Visa.
The sale of cut-away commercials will reportedly be an open process.
FIFA will control the in-stadium branding of the breaks. At last summer's Club World Cup in the United States, they were called "Powerade hydration breaks" on the video boards. Powerade is a Coca-Cola product.
South American confederation CONMEBOL added mandatory 90-second hydration breaks to the Copa Libertadores, its flagship continental club competition, in February. The coverage doesn't cut to advertisements during this time.
Get unrivaled matchday access
On June 19, 1999, the U.S. Women's National Team began its historic World Cup run that put the second star above its crest. Mia Hamm, Julie Foudy and Kristine Lilly secured the 3-0 win against Denmark in front of a record crowd of 78,972 at Giants Stadium in East Rutherford, N.J.
Somewhere up in the stands was 11-year-old Tobin Heath, alongside her youth club teammates, captivated and inspired by the players down on the field.
“That stadium was completely full,” Heath said. “I had never seen women athletes being celebrated in this way, and it was powerful. The success of the National Team has been driven by these legendary wins, and the ‘99 World Cup was by far the most pivotal because it showed the future of women's sports.”
Heath played a role in that future with the USWNT, earning her first senior team cap in 2008 before becoming a mainstay with the squad for the next 13 years. She played her final game for the U.S. in 2021 before officially announcing her retirement last summer. She will be inducted into the National Soccer Hall of Fame on May 1, 2026.
In a full circle moment, the Basking Ridge, N.J., native will return to her home state on March 7 for a retirement celebration ahead of the USA's SheBelieves Cup match against Colombia at Sports Illustrated Stadium. The self-proclaimed “Jersey girl, through and through” noted the significance of this return, considering she spent most of her professional career on the West Coast or internationally.
“It was important for me to do my [retirement celebration] in New Jersey, just because of how much it means to me and my roots as a footballer,” Heath said. “It will be really special to go back to my stomping grounds and to be able to involve people that were within the beginning of my career to celebrate.”
New Jersey built the foundation of the winger's career, which included 36 goals and 42 assists in 181 international appearances. She won two Olympic gold medals (2008, 2012), one bronze (2020) and back-to-back FIFA Women's World Cup titles (2015, 2019). She also won two NWSL championships with the Portland Thorns, and before that, was a three-time NCAA champion with the University of North Carolina Tar Heels.
“Always being in that culture of expecting to win and waking up each day with the goal that you have to win is really exciting and thrilling, and it never lets you settle for a second,” Heath said. “I always say that the National Team isn't a place that you stay. You're lucky if you get as long as a career as myself and a bunch of others have had, but it's really a place that you pass through, and you want to make the biggest mark and be as additive as you can to the legacy of the program.”
One of the defining moments of the WNT and Heath's legacy was the 2015 World Cup. She started in five of the seven matches, including the Final where she scored the last goal in the 5-2 win over Japan to secure her first World Cup title and the team's third, a feat no other country had achieved.
But according to Heath: “You have to go back to 2011 to understand 2015.”
Heath made her World Cup debut in 2011, entering as a substitute in four matches. She came on for Megan Rapinoe in the 114th minute of the World Cup Final, also against Japan, mere minutes before the Nadeshiko netted the equalizer to send the match to a penalty shootout.
The U.S. had missed the first two kicks when Heath stepped up to take the third. Her shot was read the whole way by Japan's Ayumi Kaihori as she made her second save of the shootout. Japan went on to win 3-1 on penalties.
“That loss and that pain of 2011… we were almost over-prepared for [2015] because we didn't want to have a similar situation,” Heath said. “So, we came out really fast, almost like rabid animals. We took that game over from the get-go.”
A 13-minute hat trick from Carli Lloyd and a spectacular volley from Lauren Holiday put the USA ahead 4-1 going into halftime of the 2015 Final. An own goal by the U.S. started to shift momentum in Japan's direction, but the Americans earned a corner kick and Heath sent a pass from Morgan Brian first-time into the back of the net for what she called “the nail in the coffin.”
While Heath admitted nothing in her career tops that goal – and despite ranking in the top-20 of all USWNT scorers – she still doesn't consider herself a goal scorer.
“When I come off the field, it's just a matter of if I felt good about my performance, and I don't really judge performance by goals,” Heath said. “That just wasn't really my role. But it's always fun to score goals. If I'm going to score goals, I want to do it in a creative, cool way.”
That skillful fluidity was more of Heath's calling card. She was mesmerizing with the ball, never afraid to take on a player 1-v-1 even if it meant embarrassing them in the process. During a match early in her National Team career, she nutmegged two Canadian defenders back-to-back. In her final game in a U.S. jersey, her hesitation move sent a Korean defender to the ground before Heath played a pass that was the last assist of her international career. She had found the balance of contributing to the team's success while making it exciting to watch.
“At the end of the day, football is supposed to be fun,” Heath said. “I always wanted to play the game in a fun way, but you still have to win. When you get to be really honed in on your craft, you can make the two dance together.”
Heath was still doing that when she played her last professional match in August of 2022. She was placed on Seattle Reign's season-ending injury list shortly afterwards, not knowing it would become career-ending. When she announced her retirement nearly three years later on her podcast, The RE—CAP Show, she discussed her knee problems, multiple surgeries and the journey of trying to return to play while processing the reality that it wouldn't happen.
Getting to compete alongside USWNT legends like Lilly, Lloyd and Christie Rampone, the three most-capped players in program history, Heath wanted to replicate that longevity. She said she never expected 2019 to be the last World Cup she would play in, especially when she felt like her game was still ascending.
“I don't look at life through a rearview mirror at all, but I just want to play more football,” Heath said. “I want to play more important games and win more trophies because it was thrilling in a way that I felt was a big purpose in my life.
“But also, not losing the passion, that's almost harder than losing the physical ability,” she added. “The U.S. Women's National Team, you can't take your foot off the gas for a second and still be there. I didn't have any of those feelings in 2019. My foot was fully on the gas. I was just stoked for the next iteration of my game, and I was frothing at the idea of getting better at certain things. The hard part is when you still want to hone your craft, but you can't do it anymore. That was part of my hardest mourning, losing the thing that I love to do the most.”
While her passion can no longer be executed on the pitch, Heath remains heavily involved in the soccer world through other means. Her podcast, which she hosts with her wife and USWNT teammate Christen Press, is part of their company RE, a global sports media brand that seeks to improve the world through the unifying power of sport. In just this past year, she was part of the Technical Study Group (TSG) at the FIFA Club World Cup 2025 while also leading the Player Advisory Council for World Sevens Football, a new 7v7 women's soccer tournament.
“I'm obsessed with every part of this game, and I know that the rest of my life will be dedicated to continuing to nurture it and grow it and make it better,” Heath said. “There's so many unique avenues to do so, and I love all of them.”
Heath's mentorship of current USWNT players is another avenue that is already making an impact. Midfielder Sam Coffey said Heath is the team's biggest supporter and revealed that the veteran often messages new players to congratulate them after they earned their first cap. Coffey called Heath the “perfect example of someone who's left this program better than she found it.”
What the 99ers were to Heath, she has become to this current squad. And while no one else will quite replicate what she brought to the game, her legacy will continue in the next iteration of the U.S. Women's National Team.
“When I get to see a little glimpse of myself on the field, I think that's pretty cool,” Heath said. “Ultimately, I just want the performance on the field to keep getting better. I think that's our legacy. I hope one day this next generation is lifting a World Cup trophy, hopefully sooner rather than later, and they're all talking about when they were watching ‘15 and ‘19. That would be amazing.”
Al-Nassr manager Jorge Jesus has confirmed that Cristiano Ronaldo is facing a prolonged spell on the sidelines following a significant muscular setback. The Portuguese icon has travelled to Madrid to undergo specialist rehabilitation as concerns grow over his availability for both club and country during a pivotal period of the season.
Al-Nassr have been rocked by news that Ronaldo's recent physical complaints are more debilitating than initially feared. After limping out of his last competitive outing with thigh pain, subsequent medical evaluations have revealed a significant tear in the back of his right thigh. Consequently, the veteran forward has been ruled out of Al-Nassr's immediate fixtures, including the clash against Neom. To expedite his recovery, Ronaldo utilised his private jet to fly to the Spanish capital this week, seeking the expertise of his long-term personal medical team. This move comes at a time of heightened regional tension, yet the club have prioritised the player's access to familiar, high-level healthcare to ensure a successful return.
During a pre-match press conference, Al-Nassr head coach Jesus was transparent regarding the severity of the situation. He highlighted that the decision to send the captain abroad was based on the specific nature of the muscular damage discovered during internal testing. "In the last game he left with muscle complaints," Jesus explained to reporters, as quoted by A Bola. "After undergoing tests it became clear that the injury was more serious than expected, requiring rest and recovery. Cristiano travelled to Spain... the injury requires treatment in Madrid with the professional who works with him."
The timing of this injury is particularly problematic for both Al-Nassr and the Portuguese national team. Early reports suggest a minimum four-week recovery period, which places Ronaldo's participation in upcoming international friends in serious jeopardy. Portugal are scheduled to face Mexico and the United States as they ramp up preparations for the 2026 World Cup, and the captain's absence would deprive Roberto Martinez of vital tactical continuity. Domestically, Al-Nassr's campaign has already faced disruption; Their recent Asian Champions League 2 fixture against Al Wasl was postponed amid regional instability, leaving the squad with a disjointed rhythm just as their talisman entered the treatment room.
Add GOAL.com as a preferred source on Google to see more of our reporting
Ronaldo's recovery in Madrid will be monitored to return for the Saudi domestic season's business end. Al-Nassr must be careful not to drop points in their hectic schedule to win silverware. The club's medical staff will keep in touch with Spanish specialists to see if the 41-year-old can beat the four-week prognosis.
Log in
Subscribe Now
Region
Search
Top News
Podcasts
Connections: Sports Edition
NFL
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Fantasy
NFL Odds
NFL Picks
NFL Draft
Podcasts
Scoop City Newsletter
Top 150 Free Agents
QB Predictions
Time to Trade Crosby?
Brugler Mock Draft
Top 100 Draft Prospects
NBA
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
The Bounce Newsletter
NBA Draft
Podcasts
Fantasy
NBA Odds
NBA Picks
Jayson Tatum Updates
Fans Embracing The Tank
ABA Players' Long Shot
Latest Mock Draft
MLB
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
The Windup Newsletter
Fantasy
MLB Prospects
MLB Odds
MLB Picks
World Baseball Classic
Fans Speak Up
Top Prospects
NHL
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Fantasy
NHL Odds
NHL Picks
Olympic Men's Lookback
Olympic Women's Lookback
Red Light Newsletter
Trade Deadline News
NCAAM
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Bracket
Standings
Podcasts
NCAAW
Home
Scores & Schedule
Bracket
Standings
Podcasts
NCAAF
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Newsletter
Recruiting
Odds
Picks
Best Portal Classes
2026 CFB Predictions
Early Top 25
Transfer QB Rankings
WNBA
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Tennis
Home
2026 Men's World Cup
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Premier League
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Fantasy
The Athletic FC Newsletter
Podcasts
Investigating Stat-Padding
Man City's Foden Problem
Tomori Exclusive
Golf
Home
Coming Soon to Your Inbox
Soccer
Women's Soccer
Home
NWSL Schedule
Full Time Newsletter
Podcasts
NWSL
Women's World Cup
USWNT
College Sports
MLS
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
NWSL
Home
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Full Time newsletter
Podcasts
Global Sports
College Sports
Fantasy Baseball
Home
MLB Home
Rates & Barrels
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Hockey
Draft Kit
Customizable Cheat Sheet
Downloadable Draft Sheet
Top 600 Hitters and Pitchers
Top 300 Hitters
SP Rankings
RP Rankings
Terminology
Fantasy Football
Home
NFL Home
Scoop City
Betting
2026 Fantasy Football Rankings
2026 Dynasty Rankings
Discord
Peak
Formula 1
Home
Prime Tire newsletter
Schedule
Australian GP Practice
Alpine
Aston Martin
Audi
Cadillac
Ferrari
Haas
McLaren
Mercedes
Racing Bulls
Red Bull
Williams
Sports Business
Home
MoneyCall Newsletter
Sailing
Opinion
Home
Olympics
Home
Medal Table
Men's Olympic Ice Hockey
Women's Olympic Ice Hockey
Betting
Home
Fantasy Football
Odds
NFL Picks
UK Betting
Memorabilia and Collectibles
Culture
Home
Motorsports
Home
Podcasts
NASCAR
Women's Hockey
Home
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Teams
MMA
Home
Boxing
Home
The Pulse Newsletter
Cities
NHL Trade Deadline
World Baseball Classic
Jayson Tatum Latest
Trump's College Sports Meeting
Connections: Sports Edition
Today's Pulse Newsletter
World Cup
U.S. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.) and U.S. Rep. Nellie Pou (D-N.J.) are involved with the World Cup on the government level Chris Nieves / Rockford Register Star / USA Today Network; Andrew Harnik / Getty Images
Keep politics out of sports? Good luck with that at this summer's FIFA World Cup, where matters of domestic and geopolitics pose significant questions as the tournament fast approaches.
FIFA president Gianni Infantino has visited the Oval Office more than any world leader since U.S. President Donald Trump began his second term. Infantino also awarded Trump FIFA's inaugural Peace Prize at December's World Cup draw, while supporting contested claims Trump has ended eight wars globally.
Advertisement
Since then, Trump approved operations for January's capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro and last weekend's death of Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and there are now doubts as to whether Iran will participate in the World Cup.
In Mexico, meanwhile, FIFA held unscheduled talks with President Claudia Sheinbaum after violence erupted in host city Guadalajara, where the killing of Mexican drug lord Nemesio “El Mencho” Oseguera Cervantes caused widespread unrest in the city and surrounding Jalisco state.
In the U.S., issues over travel bans and visa restrictions impacting qualified nations persist, and the 11 host cities await $625 million in federal funds, the delay tied to the partial government shutdown impacting the Department of Homeland Security. Meanwhile, uncertainty lingers over the World Cup role of U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and U.S. politicians have criticized FIFA over the unprecedented ticket prices.
The Athletic spoke to two U.S. politicians closer than most to these challenges. U.S. Rep. Darin LaHood (R-Ill.) is a keen soccer advocate, co-chairing the bipartisan congressional soccer caucus. He has attended events organized by the White House's FIFA World Cup 2026 Task Force, which leads and coordinates federal efforts supporting the event. U.S. Rep. Nellie Pou (D-N.J.), meanwhile, is the leading Democrat on the House Homeland Security Task Force, which oversees World Cup security.
In February, the House Committee on Homeland Security questioned Todd Lyons, ICE's acting director, who confirmed the agency would play a “key part” in World Cup security. Lyons was testifying before the committee for the first time since federal agents shot and killed two U.S. citizens in Minnesota.
At the hearing, Lyons did not commit to pausing ICE operations during the tournament when quizzed by Pou. He said ICE's primary role, as is common at sporting events, would center on Homeland Security investigations.
“I'm absolutely looking for reassurance,” Pou told The Athletic. “Here's why: we have not been given any indication what the plans are. Two weeks ago, the head of ICE told me that ICE would play a key role at the World Cup and refused to rule out immigration enforcement raids. Just last week, a senior tournament official claimed that they had not heard from ICE on any of these plans. So am I concerned? Absolutely. This lack of coordination is completely alarming to me.”
Advertisement
Asked if FIFA should do more, she said: “FIFA have a role to play here. They have the leverage. They should use it. They gave Trump a peace prize. So let's be real: we need to make sure that they do their job. They should take on responsibility of making sure that everything that needs to be put in place to to ensure a secure and safe games. If that means putting pressure on the Trump administration, then that's exactly what they need to do.”
According to LaHood, rhetoric surrounding ICE has been dialed down more recently.
“I don't think the optics of what happened in Minnesota or maybe L.A. or Chicago, that's not the best. But I think all of that has been dissipated for now,” he said. “We're in the process of passing the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill with reforms in there. … Those issues will not be a factor on whether fans from Europe or South America or Asia are going to come to the World Cup. Sport and the World Cup transcends politics.”
In December, Trump imposed partial travel bans on nationals of Senegal and Ivory Coast, with Iranian and Haitian nationals already facing travel restrictions. All four of those nations have qualified for the World Cup and have group games in the U.S. There are exemptions for athletes, support staff and immediate relatives of competitors — but not for traveling fans.
Trump's proclamations suspended U.S. entry for nationals of the four countries, both as immigrants and non-immigrants, including in the visitor category for business and tourism – the latter of which would be required to attend the World Cup. In the cases of Haiti, Ivory Coast and Senegal, the administration largely attributed the bans to what it said was high overstay rates on non-immigrant visas.
Trump's executive order in June described Iran as a “state sponsor of terrorism,” alleging it “regularly fails to cooperate with the United States Government in identifying security risks.”
Does LaHood want exemptions applied to those who are purchasing World Cup tickets?
Advertisement
“There's a national security and intelligence component,” he said. “I will leave that to the discretion of our national security experts. … I think there will be a more scrutinized process. But again, that's because of the national security concerns. I have confidence that they'll have an adequate fan base. They may just have to go through a different process.”
At this stage, that process doesn't appear to be known.
FIFA previously secured concessions of sorts. In November, the administration moved towards facilitating global access for fans by launching the FIFA PASS. It's not a visa but a prioritized visa appointment system for those who have purchased tournament tickets. Applicants still face rigorous security and screening processes, with no indication that nationals of countries facing travel bans will be able to enter by buying a FIFA ticket.
LaHood insists things are much improved from a year prior, saying it is important “to maintain the streamlining to ensure anybody that wants to come to this country as a fan can go through the proper visa process.”
This past weekend, global tensions spiraled following U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, and retaliatory strikes against neighboring Middle Eastern states. On Tuesday, Trump said he did not care whether Iran competed at the tournament. Iran's football federation had suggested its involvement was imperiled.
“It's too early to tell,” LaHood said. “But what's amazing is the quality of their team. They qualified in a very difficult division. They deserve to be in the World Cup like they deserved to be in the World Cup in Qatar four years ago. Put aside the politics of what's going on there and the taking out of the Ayatollah. If you put the soccer team in a silo, they deserve to be there and I hope they come and participate.”
Advertisement
Pou acknowledged there was “concern,” over what the events meant in the Middle East and also for safety in the U.S.
“The World Cup should unite the world, not divide the world,” she said. “This is something that America needs to make sure that we become a leader on.”
The funding the U.S. host cities await to assist with security preparations has yet to be administered via the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). FEMA falls under DHS, which is currently unfunded due to the partial shutdown.
At a Homeland Security hearing last week, Kansas City police officials and a Miami World Cup host committee executive claimed the funding gap risked derailing the tournament's planning and security. Miami's committee chief operating officer said his city would consider cancelling its 23-day FIFA Fan Fest unless the money landed in 30 days. The host cities then collectively wrote to the White House Task Force, urging the fast processing of funds.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem attempted to blame Democrats and claimed “FEMA was in the final stages of reviewing applications to ensure proper oversight” of the World Cup funds when the shutdown started on February 14. Pou has since produced a document of FEMA's official Notice of Funding Opportunity, which revealed the anticipated award date was “no later than January 30, 2026,” suggesting the processing of funds was already running late.
“Congress passed $625 million to keep stadiums and fans safe. Those funds are yet to be handed out. They are currently being withheld. It's being politicized. This money needs to be released immediately,” Pou said. “These events will bring millions of people to our regions. Local law enforcement will have their hands full, and they're going to need every single dollar. Many of these (hosting) towns are super small, and they do not have the wherewithal to just put up that money ahead of time without having those funds in place.”
An example of the tension is seen in Foxboro, Mass., whose Gillette Stadium will host seven games. Currently, the local select board is refusing to hand out an entertainment license to FIFA, amid federal funding delays and a lack of assurances from the Boston host committee and FIFA.
Advertisement
Pou, however, insists she is “excited about” the World Cup and says it is a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” for her New Jersey district, which will host the final.
Tickets have become a political lightning rod as FIFA's decision to use dynamic pricing and take 15 percent on both ends of resale on their own platform have attracted criticism.
Prices are the highest in World Cup history, and the global backlash inspired FIFA to create a small amount of $60 tickets. That category, however, is only for 1.6 percent of total tickets available for each game. Following the draw, FIFA raised prices for most games, with some standard group-stage tickets at $700 and a lower-level ticket to the final at $8,680.
Even parking surprised supporters, with FIFA charging $225 for a spot near MetLife Stadium (including for disabled parking) and up to $300 for spaces close to L.A.'s SoFi Stadium.
“It should be absolutely less expensive,” Pou said. “Plain and simple. It should absolutely be cheaper than the amount that they're doing. They're using these games to hike up their prices.”
LaHood also expressed pricing concern, adding, “There still could be some changes that happen between now and the kickoff. However, I'm also a big believer in the free market system, and there will be plenty of opportunities to take in the atmosphere of the World Cup, the fan zones, the opportunity in different cities to watch the games at big events.”
FIFA has argued high demand justifies the prices, also insisting the majority of revenue is redistributed into the global soccer ecosystem.
Spot the pattern. Connect the terms
Find the hidden link between sports terms
Play today's puzzle
Adam Crafton is a British journalist based in New York City, having relocated from London in 2024. He primarily covers soccer for The Athletic. In 2024, he was named the Sports Writer of the Year by the Sports' Journalist Association, after winning the Young Sports Writer of the Year award in 2018. Follow Adam on Twitter @AdamCrafton_
Barcelona manager Hansi Flick has challenged teenage star Lamine Yamal to take greater responsibility for his physical well-being amidst a mounting injury crisis. As the Catalan giants chase domestic and European glory, their depleted squad is facing a severe test of endurance. The German coach insists that players must learn to self-manage during this crucial period.
Ahead of a daunting trip to San Mames to face Athletic Club, the Blaugrana are navigating a precarious fitness situation, with the heavy workload of teenage sensation Yamal becoming a central concern. The physical toll on the squad has thrust the young winger into the spotlight, and the club are desperate to protect him from burnout amid a gruelling domestic schedule. The squad's overall depth has been severely compromised, leaving the technical staff scrambling for viable tactical solutions. While the imminent return of veteran forward Robert Lewandowski offers a timely offensive boost, the broader picture remains highly concerned for a side battling to maintain their slim advantage over Real Madrid.
Yamal has featured 35 times in all competitions for Barcelona this season, only missing six matches through injury and suspension. He has started from the bench on just two occasions - in the Supercopa de Espana semi-final and against Real Sociedad in his first La Liga game back from injury in September. Calls to manage his playing time are growing due to his age but Flick says the player must bare some responsibility for his workload.
Speaking at a press conference ahead of the crucial match, the German coach said when asked about Yamal: "Managing players and their playing time isn't easy. I talk to all the players; they know whether they're going to play or not. I have my plan, but I also place this responsibility on the players because they have to learn to manage themselves to play for the next two weeks. We need everyone until the end of the season. Sometimes we decide together, sometimes I do. This is how I want to manage my team."
Rather than attributing the recent spate of frustrating physical setbacks to the club's medical department, the head coach has commendably taken on the pressure while calling upon La Masia academy graduates to step up seamlessly. The Catalan club saw Jules Kounde go off early with an injury against Atletico Madrid, only to see his replacement, Alejandro Balde, to be taken off later in the game. Those two are joined by Gavi, Frenkie de Jong and Andreas Christensen on the injury list.
"These things happen. I'm not happy," he said. "I already said that after the match. We need to talk about what we can improve. That's always my responsibility, and that's what I want to see. Not the medical staff or the physios, it's my responsibility. I'm concerned about this. I want to talk to the doctors, the physios, the technical staff, see what we can improve. It's about managing the team. It's not pleasant, especially at a crucial moment like this. We're optimistic. This gives other players the opportunity to show how good they are."
Add GOAL.com as a preferred source on Google to see more of our reporting
Barcelona must now survive the notoriously intimidating Basque atmosphere this weekend as they clash with a notoriously resilient Athletic Club. This demanding fixture represents a significant hurdle in their ongoing quest for domestic supremacy, particularly given the massive physical toll of recent punishing encounters. Barca are four points clear of Real Madrid heading into the weekend's fixtures.
Log in
Subscribe Now
Region
Search
Top News
Podcasts
Connections: Sports Edition
NFL
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Fantasy
NFL Odds
NFL Picks
NFL Draft
Podcasts
Scoop City Newsletter
Top 150 Free Agents
QB Predictions
Time to Trade Crosby?
Brugler Mock Draft
Top 100 Draft Prospects
NBA
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
The Bounce Newsletter
NBA Draft
Podcasts
Fantasy
NBA Odds
NBA Picks
Fans Embracing The Tank
ABA Players' Long Shot
Latest Mock Draft
NBA Contenders Tiers
MLB
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
The Windup Newsletter
Fantasy
MLB Prospects
MLB Odds
MLB Picks
World Baseball Classic
Fans Speak Up
Top Prospects
NHL
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Fantasy
NHL Odds
NHL Picks
Olympic Men's Lookback
Olympic Women's Lookback
Red Light Newsletter
Trade Deadline News
NCAAM
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Bracket
Standings
Podcasts
NCAAW
Home
Scores & Schedule
Bracket
Standings
Podcasts
NCAAF
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Newsletter
Recruiting
Odds
Picks
Best Portal Classes
2026 CFB Predictions
Early Top 25
Transfer QB Rankings
WNBA
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Tennis
Home
2026 Men's World Cup
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Premier League
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Fantasy
The Athletic FC Newsletter
Podcasts
Investigating Stat-Padding
Man City's Foden Problem
Tomori Exclusive
Golf
Home
Coming Soon to Your Inbox
Soccer
Women's Soccer
Home
NWSL Schedule
Full Time Newsletter
Podcasts
NWSL
Women's World Cup
USWNT
College Sports
MLS
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
NWSL
Home
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Full Time newsletter
Podcasts
Global Sports
College Sports
Fantasy Baseball
Home
MLB Home
Rates & Barrels
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Hockey
Draft Kit
Customizable Cheat Sheet
Downloadable Draft Sheet
Top 600 Hitters and Pitchers
Top 300 Hitters
SP Rankings
RP Rankings
Terminology
Fantasy Football
Home
NFL Home
Scoop City
Betting
2026 Fantasy Football Rankings
2026 Dynasty Rankings
Discord
Peak
Formula 1
Home
Prime Tire newsletter
Schedule
Australian GP Practice
Alpine
Aston Martin
Audi
Cadillac
Ferrari
Haas
McLaren
Mercedes
Racing Bulls
Red Bull
Williams
Sports Business
Home
MoneyCall Newsletter
Sailing
Opinion
Home
Olympics
Home
Medal Table
Men's Olympic Ice Hockey
Women's Olympic Ice Hockey
Betting
Home
Fantasy Football
Odds
NFL Picks
UK Betting
Memorabilia and Collectibles
Culture
Home
Motorsports
Home
Podcasts
NASCAR
Women's Hockey
Home
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Teams
MMA
Home
Boxing
Home
The Pulse Newsletter
Cities
NHL Trade Deadline
Tatum Nearing Return
World Baseball Classic
Connections: Sports Edition
Today's Pulse Newsletter
La Liga
Denis Doyle
Jude Bellingham will miss the first leg of the Real Madrid Champions League last-16 tie against Manchester City as the midfielder continues to recover from a hamstring injury, according to multiple sources briefed on the matter.
Sources say Madrid are hoping that Bellingham, 22, will be ready for the second leg on Tuesday, March 17, although they see the Madrid derby five days later as a more realistic date. Kylian Mbappe is also not expected to play in the first leg in Madrid six days earlier, sources added, and is similarly a doubt for the game in Manchester.
Advertisement
Bellingham has been in London to see a specialist about his hamstring injury, while Mbappe was in Paris to similarly get a second opinion on his left knee sprain. Both visits were conducted alongside members of Madrid's medical department, with the plan for both players to be back in the Spanish capital over the weekend.
Sources said that the timeframes for both players' returns are unclear. With Mbappe having experienced knee pain since December, sources added that there are fears of aggravating the problem if the 27-year-old returns too early. Following the City second leg, Madrid's only other game before the international break is the derby against Atletico Madrid on Sunday, March 22.
Bellingham has not played since sustaining the injury early in the 2-1 win over Rayo Vallecano on February 1. The Athletic reported last month that the injury is more complex than initially suggested by the club, according to sources with knowledge of the situation, and that he was unlikely to return in early March as first expected, with an updated recovery timeline set then at six to eight weeks. This week, he has sought a second opinion on the issue in the English capital, travelling with Madrid's head of medical services Dr Niko Mihic.
The Athletic reported earlier this week that Mbappe is not expecting to have to undergo surgery on his knee issue, according to a statement from his camp. The club has described the injury as a knee sprain, with the Frenchman's camp saying that “additional tests are being carried out in order to assess the progress of his knee injury” in Paris.
The uncertainty over the players' return dates means it is unclear whether they will play before the next international window, the final national team camp before the World Cup.
Thomas Tuchel is expected to announce his England squad on Friday, March 20, ahead of his side facing Uruguay and Japan in friendlies on March 27 and 31 respectively, and said last month that Bellingham was “pushing” to be involved but it was uncertain. France have friendlies against Brazil and Colombia on March 26 and 29 respectively.
Bellingham has made 28 appearances in all competitions for Madrid this season, scoring six goals and providing four assists. Mbappe has played 33 times this term, registering 38 goals and six assists.
Spot the pattern. Connect the terms
Find the hidden link between sports terms
Play today's puzzle
Iran state TV presenter has threatened women's national team for not singing anthem at opening AFC Cup match.
Share
Save
The global representative organisation for professional footballers, FIFPRO, has urged governing bodies responsible for the 2026 Women's Asian Football Confederation Cup to protect the Iran national team after they were labelled “wartime traitors” by an Iranian state television presenter.
Both FIFA, world football's governing body, and the AFC have been called upon to “undertake all necessary steps to ensure the safety of Iran's Women's National Team players”.
The Iran women's national football team players did not sing their national anthem before their Asian Cup opener against South Korea in Australia earlier this week.
Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting presenter Mohammad Reza Shahbazi said in a video that the players showed a lack of patriotism and their actions amounted to the “pinnacle of dishonour” in footage circulating widely on social media.
“Let me just say one thing: traitors during wartime must be dealt with more severely,” Shahbazi said.
“Anyone who takes a step against the country under war conditions must be dealt with more severely. Like this matter of our women's football team not singing the national anthem … these people must be dealt with more severely.”
In a statement released on the social media platform X, FIFPRO released a strong and lengthy statement outlining its concerns.
“In addition to the dangerous situation the players would face if they return to Iran following the tournament, FIFPRO Asia/Oceania is deeply concerned by reports that Iranian state television has publicly attacked the members of the team for remaining silent during the national anthem before their opening match,” the statement read.
“Footage circulating online shows Mohammad Reza Shahbazi, a state TV presenter, calling for them to face the ‘stigma of dishonour and betrayal'.
“These statements significantly heighten concerns for the players' safety should they return to Iran after the tournament.
“FIFPRO Asia/Oceania has once again written to the AFC and FIFA, calling on them to uphold their human rights obligations under the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and FIFA's Human Rights Policy and protect the players.
“We call on the AFC and FIFA to urgently engage with the Iranian Football Association, the Australian Government and all other relevant authorities to ensure that every effort is made to protect the safety of the players.”
The Iranian players stood in silence when Iran's anthem was played at the Gold Coast ahead of their 3-0 opening loss to South Korea on Monday, though they sang and saluted before a 4-0 defeat by hosts Australia three days later.
The Reuters news agency has contacted both the Asian Football Confederation, the Iranian football federation and the team at the Asian Cup for comment.
Ahead of their game against Australia, Iran forward Sara Didar fought back tears and spoke about the war, while coach Marziyeh Jafari said her players were doing their best to focus on the tournament despite concern for their families back home.
Iran face the Philippines on Sunday in their final group match.
Follow Al Jazeera English:
Log in
Subscribe Now
Region
Search
Top News
Podcasts
Connections: Sports Edition
NFL
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Fantasy
NFL Odds
NFL Picks
NFL Draft
Podcasts
Scoop City Newsletter
Top 150 Free Agents
QB Predictions
Time to Trade Crosby?
Brugler Mock Draft
Top 100 Draft Prospects
NBA
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
The Bounce Newsletter
NBA Draft
Podcasts
Fantasy
NBA Odds
NBA Picks
Jayson Tatum Updates
Fans Embracing The Tank
ABA Players' Long Shot
Latest Mock Draft
MLB
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
The Windup Newsletter
Fantasy
MLB Prospects
MLB Odds
MLB Picks
World Baseball Classic
Fans Speak Up
Top Prospects
NHL
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Fantasy
NHL Odds
NHL Picks
Olympic Men's Lookback
Olympic Women's Lookback
Red Light Newsletter
Trade Deadline News
NCAAM
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Bracket
Standings
Podcasts
NCAAW
Home
Scores & Schedule
Bracket
Standings
Podcasts
NCAAF
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Newsletter
Recruiting
Odds
Picks
Best Portal Classes
2026 CFB Predictions
Early Top 25
Transfer QB Rankings
WNBA
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
Tennis
Home
2026 Men's World Cup
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Premier League
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Fantasy
The Athletic FC Newsletter
Podcasts
Investigating Stat-Padding
Man City's Foden Problem
Tomori Exclusive
Golf
Home
Coming Soon to Your Inbox
Soccer
Women's Soccer
Home
NWSL Schedule
Full Time Newsletter
Podcasts
NWSL
Women's World Cup
USWNT
College Sports
MLS
Home
Teams
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Podcasts
NWSL
Home
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Full Time newsletter
Podcasts
Global Sports
College Sports
Fantasy Baseball
Home
MLB Home
Rates & Barrels
Fantasy Football
Fantasy Hockey
Draft Kit
Customizable Cheat Sheet
Downloadable Draft Sheet
Top 600 Hitters and Pitchers
Top 300 Hitters
SP Rankings
RP Rankings
Terminology
Fantasy Football
Home
NFL Home
Scoop City
Betting
2026 Fantasy Football Rankings
2026 Dynasty Rankings
Discord
Peak
Formula 1
Home
Prime Tire newsletter
Schedule
Australian GP Practice
Alpine
Aston Martin
Audi
Cadillac
Ferrari
Haas
McLaren
Mercedes
Racing Bulls
Red Bull
Williams
Sports Business
Home
MoneyCall Newsletter
Sailing
Opinion
Home
Olympics
Home
Medal Table
Men's Olympic Ice Hockey
Women's Olympic Ice Hockey
Betting
Home
Fantasy Football
Odds
NFL Picks
UK Betting
Memorabilia and Collectibles
Culture
Home
Motorsports
Home
Podcasts
NASCAR
Women's Hockey
Home
Scores & Schedule
Standings
Teams
MMA
Home
Boxing
Home
The Pulse Newsletter
Cities
NHL Trade Deadline
World Baseball Classic
Jayson Tatum Latest
Trump's College Sports Meeting
Connections: Sports Edition
Today's Pulse Newsletter
World Cup
A view from ref cam at a 2025 FIFA World Cup quarterfinal between PSG and Bayern Munich FIFA
ATLANTA — The 2026 World Cup will be the first tournament in the booming era of artificial intelligence. Generative AI is becoming normalized across industries, at a stunning rate of speed. Football is no different. The sport has been immersed in the information game for decades, but this summer's World Cup could usher in a new standard for data mining in sport.
Advertisement
During a recent planning meeting in Atlanta, FIFA representatives and officials from participating nations and confederations gathered for a week-long retreat to mark the 100-day countdown to this summer's competition. How technology and innovation will be deployed at the tournament was a key topic. Sebastian Runge, FIFA's head of football technology and data, touched on three specific areas where referees, teams and fans will notice some upgrades: semi-automatic offside (SAOT) and new player scans, football AI and referee body cameras.
Runge first addressed SAOT, which has already been used at the 2022 World Cup, the 2023 Women's World Cup and in several European top flights, including the Champions League, over the past four years.
“But so far,” Runge said, “it was only available to the video assistant referees and to the video match officials. What's going to happen for this World Cup is that we take this to the next level.”
One of the defining purposes of SAOT is to drastically reduce the time taken to make an offside decision. Secondary to that objective is producing a more distinct graphic that visualizes offside decisions. Runge said that a clear offside decision at the World Cup will include the assistant referees receiving an audio signal that tells them it is offside.
That ping signals that the AI system “feels very confident in the decision,” said Runge. “The system is constantly checking whether the data is good enough, whether there is not any mix up of players. If all of these checks are positive, the signal is sent to the match officials. All of that, of course, is happening within milliseconds.”
The gameplay example that Runge showed Tuesday was an offside decision during a group stage match between Wydad AC and Al Ain at last summer's Club World Cup. Canadian referee Drew Fischer heard “offside, offside” in his earpiece after Al Ain's Tongolese striker Kodjo Fo-Doh Laba appeared to equalize from close range.
Advertisement
Laba briefly protested but Fischer replied that the computer had already ruled offside. The video assistant referee match officials then checked in order to confirm. A human check is not a mandatory requirement.
Runge also explained that FIFA had experimented with sending an AI offside determination to the center referee's watch. However, referees preferred the audio message, which also includes “tight, tight” when the system flags a particularly close offside decision.
“It's still a high confidence event,” Runge said. “If the system is sending the signal and it's confident in that position, the expectation is that the referees don't delay the game as we have seen in the past.”
Delays due to what Runge referred to as traditional tools “are not good for the game,” he said, adding, “it's always our philosophy to make the job of referees and the match officials easier.” Runge added that the objective was to give match officials, namely linesman, a tool that allows them to raise their flags immediately, thus avoiding potential player injuries when an offside play continues.
A reduction in time wasted by VAR checks is not what Runge believes will advance SAOT during the World Cup. For the first time, he said FIFA will scan every participating player at the tournament. Player scans, Runge said, will “improve the (SAOT) technology even further.”
Until now, the SAOT graphic that TV audiences and VAR officials see paints the players involved as standard avatars. The grey, bald figures are of the same height, a level of uniformity that could potentially affect the AI's judgement in a tight offside call.
Lamine Yamal's shiny braces won't make the scan, but his exact height and other unique features will be updated. Per Runge, prior to the tournament, as part of the competition's normal media day-type activities, each player will step inside a 3D scanner, arms slightly spread, for a volumetric capture.
Advertisement
The reason is simple, to increase the accuracy of the system. “We will go more realistic and we will also have the grass and actual (players') faces, hair and the kits. All of that will be part of that animation,” Runge said.
Call it the video-gamification of SAOT. FIFA tested this technology at the Intercontinental Cup that took place in Qatar in December. Players from Brazilian club Flamengo were scanned prior to their participation.
FIFA will discuss the scanning process with coaches, team analysts and team managers over the coming days. Feedback, Runge said, was positive following the Intercontinental Cup, although teams were initially skeptical about the intentions.
“It's one of the bigger points that we want to discuss,” Runge said regarding the scans ahead of the World Cup. The time commitment for each player to be scanned is around 30-90 seconds.
Runge also presented what FIFA is calling Football AI Pro, which he described as a language model that analyzes the game, similar to OpenAI's ChatGPT and Microsoft CoPilot. Player analysis and overall team performance breakdowns are at the center of this technology.
Runge said teams around the world with “more resources” have already begun to access the AI Pro's data. The technology will be available to every participating country at the World Cup.
“It's focusing on the data that we have available and applying FIFA's football language that has been developed by Arsene Wenger and his team and how they see the game,” he said. “We do see a future of this tool where we want to make it available to more people,” Runge added. “But for the World Cup, the focus is on the teams and the coaching staff.
Finally, Runge confirmed that referee body cameras will be featured at all 104 matches at the World Cup. Several leagues around the world have already adopted the technology. It has become a popular form of social media content that gives viewers a first-person view of a match's key moments. “It's really to celebrate the beauty of the game, the speed of the game,” he said.
Advertisement
Runge added that FIFA's commercial and media partners are especially interested in that form of content. There will be editorial oversight regarding the referee camera footage that FIFA approves for dissemination.
Runge said that FIFA is mostly concerned with foul language being broadcast on the television feed rather than controversial calls. One additional detail Runge provided is that the referee camera will be ear-mounted rather than chest-mounted. It's all part of what could be the start of a more gamified and AI-enhanced viewing experience for major football tournaments.
Spot the pattern. Connect the terms
Find the hidden link between sports terms
Play today's puzzle
Felipe Cardenas is a senior writer for The Athletic who covers soccer in South America, North America and more. Follow Felipe on Twitter @FelipeCar
Soccer America
Home for America's Passionate Soccer Fans
Arturo Alvarez never managed to play for the senior U.S. men's national team, but he's helping to uncover the next generation of USMNT internationals.
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Soccer America is the source for America's passionate soccer fans. Our expert editorial teams take readers inside the big soccer stories in America and the world. Men's and Women's U.S. National Teams. MLS. Interviews with U.S. and world news makers. Learn More »
145 Pipers Hill Road Wilton, CT 06897 USAtel. 347-762-2640, fax 917-591-3261feedback@socceramerica.com
Enter the code sent to your email.
Email address
Enter your password
Sign in by entering the code we sent to , or clicking the magic link in the email.
Link
Copy link
Picked-up pieces while waiting for the return of Jayson Tatum . . .
⋅ Forgive me for enjoying the wonderful David vs. Goliath dustup unfolding in Foxborough (pop. 18,000-plus), where the town's five-person select board is telling greedy global giant FIFA and the all-powerful Krafts to “show us the money” if they want a license to play World Cup games at Gillette Stadium this summer.
News outlets from near and far gathered Tuesday at Foxborough Town Hall for the latest installment of Foxborough vs. FIFA. No agreement was reached during the animated session, and the board sent lawyers for Boston 26 (FIFA) home with a March 17 deadline for the town to receive $7.8 million in federal funds to provide security for seven scheduled World Cup matches.
FEATURED VIDEO
There was more noise from Boston 26 and the Krafts on Thursday, with both parties sending letters to Foxborough, pledging ultimately that the money will be there. This led to some reporting that a deal had been struck.
Not quite.
“We appreciate that the Kraft Group and BS26 are moving toward addressing the concerns of the Town but, to be clear, we have not reached an agreement with respect to their proposed funding arrangement,” board chair Bill Yukna told the Globe late Thursday. “What they have presented is essentially an agreement with themselves but such terms are not responsive to the town's requirements and will not suffice to address the Town's needs for providing security services for these events. We look forward to continue working with all stakeholders on this matter.”
Advertisement
Sorry, FIFA. Sorry, Krafts. There'll be no license until the $7.8 million has been delivered.
Not promised.
Delivered.
The Select Board of Foxborough is made up of regular townsfolk (Yukna, Stephanie McGowan, Amy LaBrache, Mark Elfman, Debbie Giardino) including a chiropractor, a restaurant waitress/mother of two, an insurance agent, and two men who've retired from town positions. They work for $90 per month — not all of them take the stipend — which means their annual salary would scarcely be enough to buy a ticket to a World Cup game at Gillette.
However, do not underestimate the board's power. It rightfully and correctly bounced “Monday Night Football” out of Foxborough for 14 years in the 20th century.
True fact.
New England sports fans of a certain age remember unruly “MNF” events when the Patriots played at their initial Foxborough home, opened in 1971 — known first as Schaefer Stadium, then Sullivan Stadium, and finally Foxboro Stadium. Between 1976-81, there were three near-riots during “Monday Night Football” at the Route One Aluminum Palace, adjacent to where Gillette now stands. There were inebriated fans running all over the field, assaults of police officers, and dozens of arrests. It was Monday night mayhem.
The Patriots' 41-7 Monday night win over the Jets at Schaefer in 1976 included 49 arrests, two deaths via heart attack, a first responder urinated on while giving a victim mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, a police officer punched in the face (suffering a broken jaw) and having his gun stolen, and two men claiming to have fallen from the top of the stands. Subsequent games vs. the Broncos (1980) and Cowboys (1981) were almost as bad.
Advertisement
“A national audience saw Schaefer Stadium turned into the NFL's version of Altamont,” Richard Johnson and Glenn Stout wrote in “The Pats,” their definitive history of the team.
In 1981, citing increased drunkenness and rowdyism at Monday night games, the Foxborough board of selectmen denied the Patriots a license to start games at 9 p.m., always the start time for “MNF” in those days. The showcase event did not return to Foxborough until 1995, one year after Robert Kraft purchased the Patriots from James Orthwein.
Patrick Sullivan, son of founder Billy Sullivan, was assistant general manager of the Patriots when Foxborough's selectmen banished “Monday Night Football.”
“We'd had some really bad nights,” he recalled. “I remember the game against the Jets that was really bad. The selectmen decided they didn't want that to happen again and that they wouldn't issue a license for those night games until things calmed down. There was no question that they had the power to do that.”
Just as they have the power now. Back at Tuesday's meeting, there was some effort by Boston 26 lawyers to question the limits of the select board's authority. This was immediately shot down by Foxborough's lawyer, Lisa Mead, who said, “With all due respect, the board has broad discretion on this license.”
Love it.
“What the select board is doing feels comparable to the longtime resident of a small town who refuses to allow their home to be bulldozed and replaced by a shopping mall,” wrote The Guardian.
Stay strong, Foxborough. Don't give in until you have the cash in hand. No promises. No commitment letters pledging that the funds are on the way; $7.8 million is chump change to FIFA and the Krafts. It's approaching 10 percent of Foxborough's annual budget.
Advertisement
Hold out for straight cash, homies.
⋅ Quiz: 1. Name four pitchers who've served as Red Sox Opening Day starters since 2020. 2. Name the five oldest living Hall of Famers who played for the Celtics. (Answers below.)
⋅ Proving that Bill Belichick was right, Alex Guerrero has taken his disruptive act to the Raiders and is reportedly having the same poisonous impact he had at Gillette. Minority owner Tom Brady named Guerrero “wellness coordinator” of the Raiders and according to The Athletic's Michael Silver, “Guerrero, who regularly attends practices and meetings, purports to possess significant organizational power, informing players of impending transactions and even indicating to staff members who don't follow his instructions that their jobs may be at risk.” Sounds like more bad baggage from one of sports' consummate frauds.
⋅ One of my great readers notes that if you combine the career hit totals of the nine players projected to be Alex Cora's regular lineup — Roman Anthony, Trevor Story, Jarren Duran, Willson Contreras, Wilyer Abreu, Caleb Durbin, Marcelo Mayer, Ceddanne Rafaela, and Carlos Narváez — they still fall 54 hits shy of Carl Yastrzemski's regular-season hit total. Yaz cracked 3,419 hits over 23 seasons. The 2026 Sox at this hour are good for 3,365.
⋅ A few days at JetBlue Park in Fort Myers, Fla., reminded me of how much things have changed regarding telephone communication for players in the clubhouse. In accordance with every other aspect of American society in 2026, it's not unusual to walk into the Red Sox' room and see multiple players sitting in front of their lockers, talking on their cellphones or staring down at their devices. None of them has ever heard of Helen Robinson.
Advertisement
Robinson was hired to work the Red Sox telephone switchboard by general manager Eddie Collins in 1941, and stayed at her post until her death at the age of 85 in 2001. Every call to Fenway went through Helen. Red Sox owner Tom Yawkey ordered Helen to take messages rather than send any calls directly to the clubhouse. It is believed this was to prevent gamblers from speaking to uniformed personnel. The order was never rescinded. Not even after Yawkey died in 1976. Wives and other family members could not get through to their husbands or fathers in the home or visitors' clubhouse.
Red Sox lifers Jim Rice and Dwight Evans — both in their 70s — smiled when I reminded them of Helen's strict system.
“That's the truth,” said Evans. “Everything went through Helen.”
It's all different now, of course. As we are finding out, in this century MLB players can communicate directly with gamblers any time they choose.
⋅ Speaking of betting, you'll get 30/1 odds if you put money down for Anthony as World Baseball Classic MVP. Aaron Judge was the pre-tourney favorite at +750. Abreu comes in at 70/1 and Duran 80/1.
⋅ Keith O'Brien's white-hot, incredibly researched “Heartland,” on the pre-Celtic life of Larry Bird, is on sale everywhere, and O'Brien is going to be in our region between now and March 18. He's at Water Street Bookstore in Exeter, N.H., on Monday, the Book Shop of Beverly Farms on Tuesday, and the Silver Unicorn Bookstore in Acton with Bob Ryan and Chad Finn on Wednesday. O'Brien's Thursday event at Brookline Booksmith is sold out, but you can still catch him at Buttonwood Books in Cohasset on March 18.
Advertisement
⋅ Five-time NBA All-Star Marques Johnson turned 70 last month and issued his annual “birthday dunk” video, a tradition he's been honoring every year since he turned 63. Check it out on YouTube.
⋅ Were any of you watching the Celtics-76ers on NBC last Sunday when analyst Tracy McGrady at halftime said the Sixers needed Tyrese Maxey to take more shots in the second half? Maxey had 18 shots at intermission and did not take McGrady's advice, finishing with a mere 34 chucks at the rim.
⋅ Is this the year Arizona finally breaks through in men's college basketball? The Wildcats finished their regular season 28-2 and are ranked second in the country, but haven't been to a Final Four since Luke Walton played for Lute Olson in 2001.
⋅ We are in the thick of state high school basketball and hockey tournaments. There will be a million great moments, none better than Nicholas Fein making a buzzer-beating shot from near midcourt to advance No. 13 seed Norwell past No. 4 Swampscott, 43-42, in Division 3 second-round action. Moments like that become town folklore and last a lifetime.
What an amazing ending! Nick Fein with the half court buzzer beater to give Norwell a 43-42 victory over Swampscott. The Clipper advance to the elite 8! pic.twitter.com/x6vrzJr9an
⋅ Army's football coach, Jeff Monken, suggests moving the Army-Navy Game back to Thanksgiving weekend, which is when it was prior to 2009. It's been played on the second Saturday of December since '09 to avoid running up against conference championship games.
⋅ Jim Leeke has written “Big Loosh,” the story of “The Unruly Life of Umpire Ron Luciano.” A Syracuse offensive tackle for Ben Schwartzwalder in the 1959 Orange Bowl, Luciano umped in the majors from 1969-79 and famously clashed with Orioles Hall of Fame manager Earl Weaver. I was a young reporter covering the O's in Chicago in 1979 when Weaver was ejected by Luciano. After Weaver was tossed, everyone at Comiskey heard an unusual announcement read over the park's PA system: “The Orioles are playing this game under protest based on the integrity of the umpire.” American League president Lee MacPhail was in the crowd and immediately suspended Weaver for three games.
⋅ If you see the film “Is This Thing On?” with Will Arnett, Laura Dern, and Bradley Cooper, look for Peyton Manning, who has a small role opposite Dern in which he does not play Peyton Manning. Real acting chops here.
⋅ Anagram of the week: Craig Breslow = A scribe growl.
⋅ RIP Eddie Germano, legendary Brockton Enterprise sports cartoonist who died Feb. 27 at the age of 101. Loved by all and a close friend of heavyweight champ Rocky Marciano, Germano created sports cartoons for the Enterprise and other publications (including the Globe) for more than 70 years. Visiting hours are from 2-5 p.m. Sunday at Folsom Funeral Home in Westwood.
⋅ Quiz answers: 1. Nate Eovaldi (2020, '21, '22), Corey Kluber ('23), Brayan Bello ('24), Garrett Crochet ('25); 2. Bob Cousy (97), Bailey Howell (89), Wayne Embry (88), Satch Sanders (87), Don Nelson (85).
Dan Shaughnessy is a Globe columnist. He can be reached at daniel.shaughnessy@globe.com. Follow him @dan_shaughnessy.
Digital Access
Home Delivery
Gift Subscriptions
Log In
Manage My Account
Customer Service
Delivery Issues
Feedback
News Tips
Help & FAQs
Newsroom Staff
Advertise
Newsletters
View the ePaper
Order Back Issues
News in Education
Search the Archives
Privacy Policy
Your Privacy Choices
Terms of Service
Terms of Purchase
Career Opportunities
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Boston Globe Media
What a difference five years makes.
In early 2021, Chelsea was at the top of the soccer world, an oligarch-financed, fine-tooled Premier League machine steaming toward a UEFA Champions League victory that it would parlay into a FIFA Club World Cup trophy later the same year. Wrexham, meanwhile, was near the bottom, struggling in England's lowest division under a haggard fan-ownership group keeping it on life support.
This weekend, the two will face off in England's FA Cup, putting Chelsea's half-decade business rollercoaster on the same field as Wrexham's rags-to-riches rocket ride.
The contrast in the two clubs shines a light on the entire club-soccer industry, evolving as it has into something equally affected by the disruption of the attention economy, the invasion of private equity and the resurrection of old-world resource grabs and great-power geopolitics.
“They have come from very different environments,” Kieran Maguire, a soccer-finance lecturer at the University of Liverpool, said.
For Chelsea, one of the most critical moments in club history came far away from the soccer pitch. When the Kremlin began its invasion of the Ukraine in 2022, which has since become the bloodiest conflict in Europe since World War II, the U.K. responded by sanctioning a collection of Russian oligarchs. Among them was Roman Abramovich, who had owned the west London club since 2003 after buying it for roughly $230 million (£140 million).
The U.K. government froze Abramovich's assets, limited his ability to do business in the country and restricted his travel capabilities, effectively forcing him to sell the club. It didn't take long to find a buyer, with a consortium led by California-based private equity firm Clearlake Capital and billionaire bond investor Todd Boehly prevailing. The group purchased Chelsea for $3.08 billion (£2.5 billion), while committing another $2.16 billion (£1.75 billion) to invest in the club.
Under its new ownership, Chelsea spent aggressively. The club posted a transfer deficit of about $600 million during the 2022-23 season, according to database Transfermarkt. Yet that didn't immediately yield desired results on the pitch. Chelsea finished 12th in the Premier League during a campaign that saw the club change managers three times, not to mention disappointing exists from the FA Cup and Champions League.
“They've had to box really clever to make up for, I think, some fairly expensive errors that have been made in terms of the initial involvement with owning a soccer club,” Maguire said.
And as the struggles mounted, rumors of infighting among the club's ownership group started to emerge, which Maguire described as a “rocky marriage.” In 2024, Bloomberg, citing anonymous sources, reported that Clearlake and Boehly each explored buying the other one out as the relationship between them decayed. The following year, Boehly said the fate of the partnership would rest on a resolution to Chelsea's stadium situation, which would involve leaving Stamford Bridge or expanding the capacity of the building.
“We have a big stadium development opportunity that we have to flesh out,” Boehly said in a Bloomberg video interview. “I think that's going to be where we're either aligned or we ultimately decide to go different ways.”
More recently, Chelsea seemed to get back on track. Last year, with a lineup of young talent led by Cole Palmer, the Blues won the FIFA Club World Cup and the UEFA Europa Conference League. Chelsea is now the 10th-most-valuable club in global soccer, with an enterprise value of $3.57 billion, and Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian wrote an almost $27 million check for a 10% stake in its women's team.
But old habits die hard. The men's team sacked its manager in 2026 as it sits tied for fifth place in the EPL table. Chelsea's women's side just saw the sudden departure of Paul Green, the executive widely credited for turning the squad into a WSL juggernaut.
Meanwhile, Boehly is weathering an otherwise unrelated bit of controversy, having been linked to financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in the trove of files released by the U.S. Department of Justice.
It's fitting that a club owned by two Hollywood actors would embark on a journey fit for a sports movie. In November 2020, when Wrexham was playing in the fifth tier of the English soccer pyramid, otherwise known as the National League, Deadpool star Ryan Reynolds and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia co-creator Rob McElhenney (who's since changed his last name to Mac) agreed to take over the Welsh club for no upfront money and a $2.64 million commitment to invest in its infrastructure.
Wrexham, founded in 1864, may be the third-oldest professional soccer club in the world, but its reach hardly extended beyond its county lines when Reynolds and Mac came to town. The celebrity pair aimed to use their stardom to give the team a much larger platform, with a documentary series at the center of those plans.
Welcome to Wrexham premiered on American television channel FX in August 2022, putting the club on a path to international acclaim. The multiple Emmy-winning show is now up to 49 episodes over four seasons, with a fifth on the way.
That's inspired a run of celebrity ownership in global soccer. Actor Eva Longoria joined a group that in 2021 purchased a stake in Liga MX franchise Club Necaxa, which Reynolds and Mac bought into a few years later. Daytime television host Kelly Ripa and her husband and co-star Mark Consuelos bought a minority interest in third-division Italian soccer club Campobasso FC, chronicling their ownership in an ESPN Original Series. Retired NFL stars Tom Brady and J.J. Watt also picked up shares in English clubs Birmingham City and Burnley, respectively, while Snoop Dogg became a co-owner of Wales' Swansea City.
“I think it is a fashionable thing to be done, and you can be seen for a relatively low financial investment,” Maguire said. “They are putting a small amount into a soccer club. And on the back of that, they can utilize their own brand to build the football club's brand, with a view to potentially looking for some form of an exit route, even if it just involves selling a minority share.”
But as Wrexham started to tap a wider audience that turned the hardscrabble town into an unlikely tourist destination, it also started winning. The club claimed the National League title during the 2022-23 season, kicking off a run of three promotions in as many years. Much of that success has to do with manager Phil Parkinson, an experienced promotion specialist who joined the club in 2021 after successful stints going up with Bradford City, Colchester United and Bolton Wanderers.
That same year, Wrexham also acquired star striker Paul Mullin, who scored 99 goals in 158 appearances from 2021 to 2025, as well other key additions like Elliot Lee, Ollie Palmer, Andy Cannon and James McClean.
Now, the Reds are knocking on the door of the Premier League. Wrexham currently occupies sixth place in the Championship, the second tier of English soccer, 14 points behind leader Coventry. If the club can climb into the first or second spot, or win a playoff between the next four teams, it would gain promotion to what is widely considered the best soccer league in the world.
To maintain their upward trajectory, Reynolds and Mac have had to keep spending. Wrexham dropped almost $50 million on transfers over the past two seasons, according to Transfermarkt. And the owners brought in outside capital to help. Wrexham welcomed the New York-based Allyn family as minority investors in 2024 and, a year later, after securing about $18 million in public grants, the club sold a stake to the sports arm of the $938 billion (assets) Apollo Global Management. (In an interesting twist heading into Saturday's home match against Chelsea, one of Apollo's execs is Al Tylis, a Ukrainian immigrant to the U.S. who has raised funds for his native country in the wake of the Russian war.)
“Apollo would not have got into bed on this project unless they saw a financial return on it,” Maguire said. “If it was just a gimmick, Apollo wouldn't have gotten involved.”
The long-term plans include expansion of Wrexham's Stok Cae Ras stadium, investment in the women's team and continued community development.
As far as the FA Cup goes, Chelsea should beware of Wrexham's history as a giant killer. Over the years, the Welsh club has upset Arsenal, Newcastle United and West Ham United. But if Reynolds and Mac's squad stays on its current trajectory, it may not be long until Wrexham itself is the soccer giant.
“I remember when Wrexham beat Arsenal, when Wrexham were in the fourth tier of English football and the amount of noise that made at the time,” Maguire said. “I think if Wrexham beat the world champions in the FA Cup this weekend, it will be absolutely seismic.”
(Disclosure: Boehly's Eldridge Industries is an investor in Penske Media Corporation, Sportico's parent company.)
Get our latest stories in the feed of your favorite networks
We want to hear from you! Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Sign up for our daily newsletter
Sportico is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Sportico Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
A Foxborough official has insisted that no agreement has been reached over the funding of World Cup security costs, despite a commitment from organizers and the Kraft Group.
In a letter, signed by Boston Soccer 2026 president Mike Loynd and general counsel Curtis Franks, the organizers on Thursday committed to paying any public safety costs within two business days of being invoiced. The host committee also sent written documentation that Kraft Sports & Entertainment, a division of the Kraft Group that owns the stadium, will backstop the funding if needed.
At the heart of the dispute is nearly $8 million that the town says it needs to pay to local police. While Foxborough awaits money from a federal grant, which has been delayed by the partial government shutdown, town officials want the organizers to guarantee the funds up front.
Bill Yukna, chair of Foxborough Select Board, reiterated on Friday that Boston Soccer 2026's pledge was not sufficient.
"We appreciate that the Kraft Group and BS26 are moving toward addressing the concerns of the Town but, to be clear, we have not reached an agreement with respect to their proposed funding arrangement," Yukna said in a statement.
"What they have presented is essentially an agreement with themselves but such terms are not responsive to the town's requirements and will not suffice to address the Town's needs for providing security services for these events.
"We look forward to continue working with all stakeholders on this matter but any suggestion that BS26 or the Kraft Group have adequately addressed the Town's concerns is false."
In an attempt to address town officials' concerns about the host committee's finances, Loynd and Franks wrote that the committee had $2 million in its bank accounts as of Thursday morning and will receive at least $30 million more.
"With BS26's current funds, additional government funding and commercial activity, and the financial commitment from KSE, there can be no doubt that BS26 has the means to pay all amounts as they come due in connection with hosting World Cup Events," they wrote.
At a local board meeting earlier this week, two attorneys representing the host committee told town officials they would pay, but the two sides remained at odds. After the meeting, Yukna told reporters that while the host committee had made assurances, the town had "seen nothing in writing."
In the letter, the organizers wrote that they believe they have addressed "each and every one of the concerns" local police and fire chiefs identified for the World Cup.
Foxborough town officials are scheduled to vote on granting FIFA a license to use the stadium for seven World Cup games at their next meeting on March 17. Gillette Stadium is set to host its first match on June 13, when Scotland takes on Haiti.
We speak with the goalkeeper about his new club and what he hopes to accomplish in DC.
United States Men's National Team goalkeeper Sean Johnson has moved on to a new club, and we discuss what he hopes will be a successful stint on Episode 176.
After three seasons with Toronto FC, Johnson signed with DC United in the offseason, a team hoping to emerge from the MLS cellar after claiming the Wooden Spoon last season. Sean Johnson has taken over the starting job for the Black-and-Red, and we speak with him about his new opportunity. We get into what has made him successful at each stop he's made, what motivates him to provide the leadership he does, and whether he maintains any dreams of making the World Cup squad.
We also talk with him about his place in the history books for the USMNT and his work with Black Players for Change. It's a nice interview with a goalkeeper who's looking to once again adapt to bring his veteran skills to help DC United climb out of the basement.
Don't forget to follow us on Bluesky, Twitter, and YouTube! Rates, reviews, and subscriptions really help our reach wherever you get your podcasts as well as on YouTube. Head to our Linktree, which will give you access to all our affiliate links and our new Stimulus store! And finally, tag us on Twitter or email USA Soccercast at Gmail dot com with any topic suggestions or questions for the show.
This is the title for the native ad
We speak with the USMNT defender on his rise to the national team and his World Cup opportunity.
We discuss the coach's comments on World Cup ticket prices.
What a fun window for the WNT!
We break down the roster and the upcoming year for the WNT.
Now that the window's closed, we discuss the next phase of the process.
Let's break down the details of US Soccer's ticket lottery as well as the new rumored 2026 jerseys.
This is the title for the native ad
© 2026 Vox Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved
Gambling Problem? Call 1-800-GAMBLER (1-800-426-2537). Hope is here. GamblingHelpLineMA.org or call (800) 327-5050 for 24/7 support (MA). Visit www.mdgamblinghelp.org (MD). Call 877-8HOPE-NY or text HOPENY (467369) (NY). 21+ (18+ D.C.) and present in select states (for KS, in affiliation with Kansas Star Casino). Call 1-888-789-7777 or visit ccpg.org/chat (CT) or visit FanDuel.com/RG.
Get unrivaled matchday access
U.S. Women's National Team head coach Emma Hayes made 10 lineup changes from the 2026 SheBelieves Cup, presented by Visa, opener against Argentina on March 1 to the March 4 match against Canada. Only one name remained on the start list: Gisele Thompson.
The 20-year-old defender played the full 90 minutes in both matches, marking just her sixth and seventh appearances with the USWNT. She also played the entire game in the 6-0 win over Paraguay in January.
“Gisele knows that my goal with her is that I need her to be more durable,” Hayes said post-game. “So, I told her, ‘You're playing 90 minutes.' That is what she is going to need to compete for this team on a regular basis, and she did a fine job.”
One of Hayes' key themes over the past year has been giving younger players more opportunities on the field, with Thompson being one of the 32 debutants for Hayes since she took over as head coach. Thompson, alongside her Youth National Team teammates like Ally Sentnor and Claire Hutton, is among the group that Hayes is looking at to give more responsibility to develop the depth heading into World Cup qualifyinglater this year.
“I always rewind back to the Olympics,” Hayes said. "I felt really clear about 14 players. The gap was much bigger in terms of experience. If the Olympics were tomorrow, I think we're in a better place. Our goal is closing that gap between now and qualifying.”
Against Canada, Thompson was deployed at left back with a license to attack, though she also had to do some serious defending throughout the night. The Under-17 and Under-20 Women's World Cup veteran controlled the flank, contributing to the backline that allowed the Canadians only one shot on target en route to the USA's seventh consecutive clean sheet.
Thompson often combined on that left flank with her older sister, Alyssa, who played on the wing in both matches of the tournament. In just over a year since Gisele made her senior team debut, the Thompson sisters have competed in five USWNT matches together. In three of those games, they were in the starting lineup together.
Like most older sisters, Alyssa was the first into the limelight, and she made a name for herself on both the club and international levels. Her debut with the senior National Team came in 2022 when she was just 17 years old. The sisters played professionally together at Angel City FC in the NWSL before Alyssa signed to English club Chelsea FC in September 2025 for a record fee. She has recorded six goals and an assist in her 14 appearances with the Blues and is currently the team's leading scorer.
Both sisters, who play much bigger than their small statures might indicate, are known for their tremendous speed, but as they become more adjusted to the highest levels of the game, their high soccer IQs also continue to push them forward.
Alyssa has earned more consistent call-ups over the past year than Gisele, but Hayes spoke to the dedication of both players and their imminent futures with the team.
“When you're the baby sibling and you've got Alyssa Thompson as your sister, that's tough,” Hayes said. “[Gisele] is having to live a little bit in the shadow of her sister, but her time will come.”
The 2026 FIFA World Cup is coming to Rutgers University.
Not the games – which will take place regionally at the Meadowlands and in Philadelphia – but training sessions for one of the teams taking part in the globe's biggest sporting event.
Chris Paladino, president of the New Brunswick Development Corporation, announced on Facebook Thursday that the Senegal national team had chosen Rutgers as its base camp.
"Mayor (James) Cahill welcomed members of the Senegal national football team to New Brunswick," Paladino wrote. "We are excited that the team from Senegal will be training at Rutgers and staying in New Brunswick."
Senegal is ranked as the No. 12 national team in the world according to the latest FIFA rankings. They are in Group I with France, Norway and a team to be determined via playoff later this month (Bolivia, Suriname or Iraq). They open the group stage against France in East Rutherford June 16 and then return to East Rutherford to face Norway June 22.
These “base camps” are where specific national teams will practice for a period of between 21 and 32 days, depending on how far they advance in the tournament.
The process of vetting and preparing these base camps has been six years in the making, according to those familiar with the process. Rutgers, for example, served as base camp for the Portuguese soccer club FC Porto during the Club World Cup in June 2025.
Base camp activities consist of practices (known as “training” in the soccer world), team meetings, team meals, film study, and locker-room usage. At Rutgers, Senegal can make use of Yurcak Field, which is where the Scarlet Knights' men's and women's soccer teams play their home games, and/or either of the two practice soccer fields nearby.
All three fields consist of natural grass – Kentucky bluegrass, to be exact – and are maintained with help from the university's turf management school.
While World Cup training sessions generally are closed to the public (security forces at these sites are expected to be considerable), the visiting national team may opt to hold special events for select audiences.
Times have changed since the World's Cup's only prior visit to the United States, in 1994. Back then, the Italian national team used Pingry as its base camp. Italian striker Robert Baggio, who at the time was the best soccer player in the world, dropped in at nearby Efinger Sporting Good store in Bound Brook to purchase some fishing equipment.
To his immense satisfaction, as he later explained to media members, not a soul recognized who he was.
Jerry Carino has covered the New Jersey sports scene since 1996 and the college basketball beat since 2003. Contact him at jcarino@gannettnj.com.
POPULAR SEARCHES
BROWSE BY
Crunch time is coming. The start of this summer's World Cup is less than 100 days away. It's an exciting time, no doubt, but for players, these can be nervy days. Especially right now, given that the U.S. men's national team hasn't been together since November.
A lot has happened since then, and the upcoming March training camp – which features matches against Belgium (March 28) and Portugal (March 31) in Atlanta – is of the utmost importance because it's the last one before Mauricio Pochettino's final 26-man roster is announced.
Those who get called up in March will feel some relief, while those who don't will feel their stress levels rise. Here's who has improved their cases, who has work to do:
Johnny Cardoso, Midfielder, Atlético Madrid
(Photo by Bruno Penas/Quality Sport Images/Getty Images)
Cardoso made this list last week after scoring his first goal for the club. This week, he started and played 90 minutes in Atleti's 3-0 loss to Barcelona. Despite the defeat, they advanced to the Copa del Rey final on 4-3 aggregate.
After battling injuries, Cardoso seems to finally be getting into a rhythm at a big La Liga club. He hasn't played for the USA since last summer and hasn't had a statement game to prove to Pochettino why he deserves a World Cup roster spot yet. But, perhaps his recent club performances and consistency might earn him a March call up.
Weston McKennie, Midfielder, Juventus
(Photo by Stefano Guidi/Getty Images)
McKennie is no doubt the hottest USA player right now. Whether he's scoring goals or showing off his versatility and playing different positions for coach Luciano Spalletti, his name is constantly making headlines. And he's likely at the top of Pochettino's list for March camp.
This week, McKennie signed a new deal at Juventus that keeps him with the Serie A club until 2030. McKennie will reportedly make $7 million per year – a well-earned deal given he's scored eight goals so far this season.
"McKennie has been a powerful tool on both the right and left wings for [manager] Luciano Spalletti, winning the hearts of the fans, and he is now reaping the rewards of his daily hard work in training," Juventus said in a statement.
Antonee ‘Jedi' Robinson, Fullback, Fulham
(Photo by Tiego Grenho/MI News/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
It's a relief for USA fans to see Robinson in the "stock up" section here. Robinson went 90 for Fulham in a 1-0 loss to West Ham on Wednesday – it was his first Premier League appearance since Feb. 1 (he started in a FA Cup match vs. Stoke City on Feb. 15). He'd been dealing with a minor ankle issue, which was concerning because Robinson had previously missed so much time after recovering from a nagging knee injury. But playing the entire match and not having to gradually build up fitness is huge.
Fulham next plays Southampton in a FA Cup match on Sunday.
Josh Sargent, Striker, Toronto FC
Finally, the saga is over. Sargent has left Norwich City and joined Toronto FC for a reported $22 million in fees. The striker signed a five-and-a-half year contract that will keep him with the MLS club through June 2031.
While the drama surrounding Sargent's desire to move closer to family in North America is behind him, what's still ahead is the fact that there's not much time left to impress Pochettino. Sargent has had his chances, but has struggled to score goals for the national team.
Maybe if he can get off to a quick start in Toronto, things will be different? We'll see. His form may have dipped in the last month after he was demoted to train with the U21 team in Norwich while waiting for this transfer. Even so, it's a net positive that he's back in MLS ahead of a pivotal summer.
Diego Luna, Forward, Real Salt Lake
(Photo by Alex Goodlett/MLS via Getty Images)
Luna is still out with a knee injury and has not played in a match for his club yet this season. After a breakthrough season in 2025, Luna seemed like a lock to make Pochettino's World Cup roster. He still should, but his availability for March camp will be key. RSL travels to Atlanta this weekend, so we'll get a health update then.
Matt Turner, Goalkeeper, New England Revolution
(Photo by Caean Couto/Getty Images)
Turner, who was the USMNT's starting goalkeeper at the 2022 World Cup, lost his spot to Matt Freese less than a year ago. Freese, who plays for NYCFC, started the last 12 matches of 2025 for the U.S., including every game in last summer's Gold Cup.
Turner is the ultimate competitor and wants his spot back. So much so that he joined the Revs last summer on loan from Lyon through June 2026. He's playing more now, which is a plus, but the club is 0-2 to start the season. Pochettino will have to see much more from him in order for Turner to replace Freese.
Christian Pulisic, Forward, AC Milan
(Photo by Claudio Villa/AC Milan via Getty Images)
Pulisic is going to be the face of the United States squad at the World Cup this summer. There's no question about that at all. But his current form is mildly concerning. The star forward has not scored a goal in nine straight matches for AC Milan. If this drought continues, it will be an unfortunate story line that Pulisic will have to address during training camp later this month.
"Any suggestion that BS26 or the Kraft Group have adequately addressed the Town's concerns is false," the Foxborough Town Board responded
"Any suggestion that BS26 or the Kraft Group have adequately addressed the Town's concerns is false," the Foxborough Town Board responded
"Any suggestion that BS26 or the Kraft Group have adequately addressed the Town's concerns is false," the Foxborough Town Board responded
Gillette Stadium announced Thursday that Kraft Sports and Entertainment committed to helping cover the security costs of hosting seven World Cup games at the venue this summer.
The announcement comes after Foxborough, Massachusetts, town officials and the Boston Host Committee went back and forth over who would cover the costs of security during the games.
"Throughout this process, Gillette Stadium has met with Town of Foxborough representatives to address Foxborough's operational concerns and is committed to financially ensuring the Town's needs are met for security related costs for the World Cup, both by financially supporting the anticipated funds Boston Soccer 2026 expects to award Foxborough through the federal FIFA World Cup Grant program and by providing financial and logistical support for additional capital expenditures," a Gillette Stadium spokesperson said in a statement.
The security bill, estimated to be $7.8 million, was the cause of concern after the Foxborough Select Board threatened in February that they would not sign off on the games until they knew who was paying the security tab.
In a commitment letter, Kraft Sports and Entertainment said payments would not exceed $1,512,490 and that payments to Boston Soccer 26 would be made in "minimum amounts of $100,000 from time to time upon request."
However, the Chair of the Foxborough Select Board responded to the announcement, saying that the town had not "reached an agreement with respect to (The Kraft Group and Boston Soccer 2026's) proposed funding arrangement."
"What they have presented is essentially an agreement with themselves, but such terms are not responsive to the town's requirements and will not suffice to address the Town's needs for providing security services for these events," Select Board Chair Bill Yukna said. "We look forward to continue working with all stakeholders on this matter, but any suggestion that BS26 or the Kraft Group have adequately addressed the Town's concerns is false."
The Foxborough Select Board would still have to vote on approving the license.
Hearst Television participates in various affiliate marketing programs, which means we may get paid commissions on editorially chosen products purchased through our links to retailer sites.
Jannik Sinner, Carlos Alcaraz and Novak Djokovic are set to headline action at the BNP Paribas Open.
Second seed Sinner, who is in the bottom half of the draw, will open his Indian Wells campaign on Friday, when he will face qualifier Dalibor Svrcina in the second round. The Italian has won all of the other five hard-court events at the ATP Masters 1000 level and is chasing his first title in the California desert.
Top seed Alcaraz, who is in the top half of the draw, will begin his bid for a third Indian Wells crown on Saturday. He will take on former World No. 3 Grigor Dimitrov in his opening match. The No. 1 player in the PIF ATP Rankings fell to eventual champion Jack Draper in the semi-finals in 2025.
You May Also Like: Alcaraz faces tricky opening test in Indian Wells, with Djokovic looming
Djokovic, who is in the same half of the draw as Alcaraz, will also start on Saturday, when he faces Kamil Majchrzak in his first match since the Australian Open final in January. The third seed is a five-time champion at the event and is seeking his 102nd tour-level title this fortnight.
Read More News
View All News
View Related Videos
View All Videos
Djokovic, who is in the same half of the draw as Alcaraz, will also start on Saturday, when he faces Kamil Majchrzak in his first match since the Australian Open final in January. The third seed is a five-time champion at the event and is seeking his 102nd tour-level title this fortnight.
Your data will be used in accordance with the
ATP Privacy Policy
and
WTA Privacy Policy.
Get official marketing communications from the ATP and WTA! We'll send you newsletters keeping you informed about news, tournaments, competitions, ticketing, partner offers and more.
Your data will be used in accordance with the
ATP Privacy Policy
and
WTA Privacy Policy.
© Copyright 1994 - 2026 ATP Tour, Inc. All Rights Reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any way or by any means (including photocopying, recording or storing it in any medium by electronic means), without the written permission of ATP Tour, Inc.. Terms & Conditions | Privacy | Community Social Media Policy | Modern Slavery Statement | Feedback | Cookies | Your Privacy Choices
The younger Williams sister is officially an active player again, but big sis refused to spill any secrets after a tough loss at the BNP Paribas Open.ByDavid KanePublished Mar 06, 2026 copy_link
Published Mar 06, 2026
© Getty Images
Venus Williams is famous for “holding her cards tight,” and she takes the same tact when discussing younger sister Serena—especially as rumors of a comeback from the 23-time Grand Slam champion abound at the BNP Paribas Open.Serena “evolved” away from tennis back in 2022, but re-entered the WADA testing pool last summer, clearing the way for her to return to action as of last month. Novak Djokovic said he hoped to see the younger Williams sister back on court by Wimbledon, but big sis Venus wasn't taking the bait in her post-match press conference on Thursday:
Serena “evolved” away from tennis back in 2022, but re-entered the WADA testing pool last summer, clearing the way for her to return to action as of last month. Novak Djokovic said he hoped to see the younger Williams sister back on court by Wimbledon, but big sis Venus wasn't taking the bait in her post-match press conference on Thursday:
Q. Will we see you and Serena play together this year, do you think?VENUS WILLIAMS: I think you should definitely ask her that.Though Venus Williams, who fell in three sets to Diane Parry in Indian Wells, never officially retired from tennis, she did take a 16-month break to address health issues in 2024, returning to the sport at 45 and becoming the oldest woman in over two decades to win a match on the WTA Tour.
VENUS WILLIAMS: I think you should definitely ask her that.Though Venus Williams, who fell in three sets to Diane Parry in Indian Wells, never officially retired from tennis, she did take a 16-month break to address health issues in 2024, returning to the sport at 45 and becoming the oldest woman in over two decades to win a match on the WTA Tour.
Though Venus Williams, who fell in three sets to Diane Parry in Indian Wells, never officially retired from tennis, she did take a 16-month break to address health issues in 2024, returning to the sport at 45 and becoming the oldest woman in over two decades to win a match on the WTA Tour.
New customers only.
She spoke more at length about Serena at the Mubadala Citi DC Open in July:“I'm her biggest fan,” she said at the time. “She can take six months off and she clocks it clean. You can't teach that kind of talent. She's just so good.“I mean, I keep saying to my team, ‘The only thing that would make this better is if she was here,' like we always did everything together, so of course I miss her. But if she comes back, I'm sure she'll let y'all know.”For her part, Serena has kept mum on a possible comeback, though she has shared practice videos on social media, most recently with fellow American Alycia Parks.
“I'm her biggest fan,” she said at the time. “She can take six months off and she clocks it clean. You can't teach that kind of talent. She's just so good.“I mean, I keep saying to my team, ‘The only thing that would make this better is if she was here,' like we always did everything together, so of course I miss her. But if she comes back, I'm sure she'll let y'all know.”For her part, Serena has kept mum on a possible comeback, though she has shared practice videos on social media, most recently with fellow American Alycia Parks.
“I mean, I keep saying to my team, ‘The only thing that would make this better is if she was here,' like we always did everything together, so of course I miss her. But if she comes back, I'm sure she'll let y'all know.”For her part, Serena has kept mum on a possible comeback, though she has shared practice videos on social media, most recently with fellow American Alycia Parks.
For her part, Serena has kept mum on a possible comeback, though she has shared practice videos on social media, most recently with fellow American Alycia Parks.
The former No. 3 outlasted Terence Atmane on Thursday, having lost to the Frenchman just last week.ByJohn BerkokPublished Mar 06, 2026 copy_link
Published Mar 06, 2026
© 2026 Getty Images
Nine days ago in Acapulco, Grigor Dimitrov lost to Terence Atmane in straight sets, 6-3, 6-3, in the first round of the ATP 500 event.On Thursday at Indian Wells, he got his revenge.The former No. 3 battled through windy conditions to outdo the Frenchman after just under two and a half hours, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4.He almost closed it out in straight sets, holding seven break points at 5-all in the second set that would've given him an opportunity to serve for the match—Atmane eventually held serve and broke in the next game to send it to a third set, but Dimitrov built an early lead and hung onto it until he had the victory in his pocket.
On Thursday at Indian Wells, he got his revenge.The former No. 3 battled through windy conditions to outdo the Frenchman after just under two and a half hours, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4.He almost closed it out in straight sets, holding seven break points at 5-all in the second set that would've given him an opportunity to serve for the match—Atmane eventually held serve and broke in the next game to send it to a third set, but Dimitrov built an early lead and hung onto it until he had the victory in his pocket.
The former No. 3 battled through windy conditions to outdo the Frenchman after just under two and a half hours, 6-4, 5-7, 6-4.He almost closed it out in straight sets, holding seven break points at 5-all in the second set that would've given him an opportunity to serve for the match—Atmane eventually held serve and broke in the next game to send it to a third set, but Dimitrov built an early lead and hung onto it until he had the victory in his pocket.
He almost closed it out in straight sets, holding seven break points at 5-all in the second set that would've given him an opportunity to serve for the match—Atmane eventually held serve and broke in the next game to send it to a third set, but Dimitrov built an early lead and hung onto it until he had the victory in his pocket.
This no look by Dimitrov needs to be studied ✍️Had to be our @BetMGM shot of the day ‼️ pic.twitter.com/s0TgeTp6zx
Dimitrov, who snapped a four-match losing streak with the win, is building his momentum back after missing almost the entire second half of 2025 with a pectoral injury from Wimbledon.“Those are the matches that actually matter to me the most right now,” he said at the Tennis Channel desk after the match.“Being able to win in such a manner, it gives me confidence, and that's what I want right now. It's been a difficult seven or eight months, and I'm just trying to find my game around the court a little bit more. I think overall the body's been holding up well, but you just never know what you're going to get on the day, and I think today was one of those days when I really had to dig deep in terms of my experience. I've been in the situation like today more than once, but being able to really register quick enough and knowing what I have to do in certain moments, it definitely helped.“Here we are, back at it, slowly but surely.”
“Those are the matches that actually matter to me the most right now,” he said at the Tennis Channel desk after the match.“Being able to win in such a manner, it gives me confidence, and that's what I want right now. It's been a difficult seven or eight months, and I'm just trying to find my game around the court a little bit more. I think overall the body's been holding up well, but you just never know what you're going to get on the day, and I think today was one of those days when I really had to dig deep in terms of my experience. I've been in the situation like today more than once, but being able to really register quick enough and knowing what I have to do in certain moments, it definitely helped.“Here we are, back at it, slowly but surely.”
“Being able to win in such a manner, it gives me confidence, and that's what I want right now. It's been a difficult seven or eight months, and I'm just trying to find my game around the court a little bit more. I think overall the body's been holding up well, but you just never know what you're going to get on the day, and I think today was one of those days when I really had to dig deep in terms of my experience. I've been in the situation like today more than once, but being able to really register quick enough and knowing what I have to do in certain moments, it definitely helped.“Here we are, back at it, slowly but surely.”
“Here we are, back at it, slowly but surely.”
Awaiting the former No. 3 in the second round will be the current No. 1, Carlos Alcaraz, who received a bye in the first round.The Spaniard is 12-0 on the year coming into Indian Wells.“Of course it's going to be a tough one—let's see it for what it is,” Dimitrov said. “I love watching him play. He's just crushing the ball."I love him, in a positive way, but at the same time these are the moments for me that the fun part begins—how, or what can I do differently, or new or interesting, that could potentially not only rattle him but put him in a position where he doesn't really like that. You never know how the game will unfold because it's always in your hands, and I believe if I do the right things and cut down on a few mistakes here and there, something good can come out of it. So I'm going to come out with that mindset, and just stay locked in.”Alcaraz leads their overall head-to-head, 4-2, but there's some good news for Dimitrov, who's actually won two of their last three meetings—a 5-7, 6-2, 6-4 win in Shanghai in 2023 and a 6-2, 6-4 win in Miami in 2024, both hard-court Masters 1000 events.But the Spaniard did win their last meeting, which was also at a hard-court Masters 1000 event—right here at Indian Wells last year, in the fourth round, and by an impressive 6-1, 6-1 scoreline.
The Spaniard is 12-0 on the year coming into Indian Wells.“Of course it's going to be a tough one—let's see it for what it is,” Dimitrov said. “I love watching him play. He's just crushing the ball."I love him, in a positive way, but at the same time these are the moments for me that the fun part begins—how, or what can I do differently, or new or interesting, that could potentially not only rattle him but put him in a position where he doesn't really like that. You never know how the game will unfold because it's always in your hands, and I believe if I do the right things and cut down on a few mistakes here and there, something good can come out of it. So I'm going to come out with that mindset, and just stay locked in.”Alcaraz leads their overall head-to-head, 4-2, but there's some good news for Dimitrov, who's actually won two of their last three meetings—a 5-7, 6-2, 6-4 win in Shanghai in 2023 and a 6-2, 6-4 win in Miami in 2024, both hard-court Masters 1000 events.But the Spaniard did win their last meeting, which was also at a hard-court Masters 1000 event—right here at Indian Wells last year, in the fourth round, and by an impressive 6-1, 6-1 scoreline.
“Of course it's going to be a tough one—let's see it for what it is,” Dimitrov said. “I love watching him play. He's just crushing the ball."I love him, in a positive way, but at the same time these are the moments for me that the fun part begins—how, or what can I do differently, or new or interesting, that could potentially not only rattle him but put him in a position where he doesn't really like that. You never know how the game will unfold because it's always in your hands, and I believe if I do the right things and cut down on a few mistakes here and there, something good can come out of it. So I'm going to come out with that mindset, and just stay locked in.”Alcaraz leads their overall head-to-head, 4-2, but there's some good news for Dimitrov, who's actually won two of their last three meetings—a 5-7, 6-2, 6-4 win in Shanghai in 2023 and a 6-2, 6-4 win in Miami in 2024, both hard-court Masters 1000 events.But the Spaniard did win their last meeting, which was also at a hard-court Masters 1000 event—right here at Indian Wells last year, in the fourth round, and by an impressive 6-1, 6-1 scoreline.
"I love him, in a positive way, but at the same time these are the moments for me that the fun part begins—how, or what can I do differently, or new or interesting, that could potentially not only rattle him but put him in a position where he doesn't really like that. You never know how the game will unfold because it's always in your hands, and I believe if I do the right things and cut down on a few mistakes here and there, something good can come out of it. So I'm going to come out with that mindset, and just stay locked in.”Alcaraz leads their overall head-to-head, 4-2, but there's some good news for Dimitrov, who's actually won two of their last three meetings—a 5-7, 6-2, 6-4 win in Shanghai in 2023 and a 6-2, 6-4 win in Miami in 2024, both hard-court Masters 1000 events.But the Spaniard did win their last meeting, which was also at a hard-court Masters 1000 event—right here at Indian Wells last year, in the fourth round, and by an impressive 6-1, 6-1 scoreline.
Alcaraz leads their overall head-to-head, 4-2, but there's some good news for Dimitrov, who's actually won two of their last three meetings—a 5-7, 6-2, 6-4 win in Shanghai in 2023 and a 6-2, 6-4 win in Miami in 2024, both hard-court Masters 1000 events.But the Spaniard did win their last meeting, which was also at a hard-court Masters 1000 event—right here at Indian Wells last year, in the fourth round, and by an impressive 6-1, 6-1 scoreline.
But the Spaniard did win their last meeting, which was also at a hard-court Masters 1000 event—right here at Indian Wells last year, in the fourth round, and by an impressive 6-1, 6-1 scoreline.
Lost in the drama of Matteo Berrettini's cramping at the end of his first-round BNP Paribas Open win Wednesday was someone in his box: former World No. 4 Thomas Enqvist.
The Italian has recently been working with the 19-time ATP Tour titlist, with their relationship dating back to Berrettini's participation in the 2021 Laver Cup, where Enqvist was vice captain for Team Europe.
“I remember the energy,” Berrettini told ATPTour.com. “When I was by myself in Boston the first time that I went there, my fitness coach arrived the day of the match, so I basically got ready with Thomas. But Thomas was the one who was taking care of my preparation, my training and everything.”
Bjorn Borg was famously one of the event's first captains alongside rival John McEnroe. And even though Berrettini was highly complimentary of Borg, one of 29 members of the ATP No. 1 Club, he was immediately struck by Enqvist's presence.
“I remember feeling this energy. This guy loves tennis and loves to work with players, and I just remember that,” Berrettini said. “I was like, ‘Who knows, maybe in the future we can work together'. And it happened, so I'm really happy and proud of that.”
You May Also Like: Berrettini wins, cramps immediately in bizarre Indian Wells scene!
Enqvist spent time in the offseason with Berrettini, who began his year last month in Buenos Aires. After losing the first set in four of his first six matches of 2026, the former No. 6 player in the PIF ATP Rankings also dropped his opener Wednesday against Adrian Mannarino.
But Berrettini dug in under the intense California sun and rallied past the Frenchman 4-6, 7-5, 7-5 in two hours and 49 minutes. After match point, he fell to the court due to the cramp. The battle left him smiling.
“That's the thing that I enjoyed the most today. I kept telling myself that these are the matches and fights that I'm working for,” Berrettini said. “All those trainings, all those days, waking up and going to hit so many balls, it is all for these moments.
“I'm so glad, I'm so happy that I could do that. The cramping is because I gave it all. I just want to feel like this when I play. That's the main goal.”
Berrettini simply hopes to put himself in such positions. The 29-year-old has struggled with injuries over the past few years and fallen as low as World No. 154.
Through the toughest moments, the Italian has worked towards moments like he enjoyed Wednesday — and opportunities like the one he's earned Friday against two-time Nitto ATP Finals champion Alexander Zverev.
“I think you've got to embrace and enjoy the process that brings you to the court because if you're too smiley out there, I feel, at least for me, it doesn't really work 100 per cent,” Berrettini said. “I need to have the kind of fear, the kind of tension that needs to be there in order to perform my best. But at the same time, when I'm feeling like I felt today, I think that's the key.”
Your data will be used in accordance with the
ATP Privacy Policy
and
WTA Privacy Policy.
Get official marketing communications from the ATP and WTA! We'll send you newsletters keeping you informed about news, tournaments, competitions, ticketing, partner offers and more.
Your data will be used in accordance with the
ATP Privacy Policy
and
WTA Privacy Policy.
© Copyright 1994 - 2026 ATP Tour, Inc. All Rights Reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any way or by any means (including photocopying, recording or storing it in any medium by electronic means), without the written permission of ATP Tour, Inc.. Terms & Conditions | Privacy | Community Social Media Policy | Modern Slavery Statement | Feedback | Cookies | Your Privacy Choices
The BNP Paribas Open doubles draw Thursday served up must-see matches between singles stars and highly seeded doubles duos.
Jannik Sinner and Reilly Opelka will face top seeds Marcel Granollers and Horacio Zeballos in a marquee opening-round matchup, while Novak Djokovic and Stefanos Tsitsipas are set to meet defending champions and third seeds Marcelo Arevalo and Mate Pavic.
Sinner and Opelka won the Atlanta title in 2021 and were slated to partner again in Miami in 2022 until Opelka withdrew with an injury. Opelka made a winning start to his Indian Wells singles campaign on Wednesday, beating fellow American Ethan Quinn, while Sinner will play his first singles match on Friday against Dalibor Svrcina.
Granollers and Zeballos, who competed together at the Nitto ATP Finals last season, have reached the Australian Open semi-finals and the Dallas final in their two events as a pair this year. They are ranked No. 3 and No. 2 in the PIF ATP Doubles Rankings, respectively.
Arevalo and Pavic won the 2025 Indian Wells crown without losing a set, beating four pairs of primarily singles players along the way—including Sebastian Korda and Jordan Thompson in the final.
Djokovic and Tsitsipas will hope to change those patterns, with the Greek likely to be especially motivated after being knocked out of the singles draw by Denis Shapovalov on Wednesday night. Djokovic is seeded third in the singles draw and will face Kamil Majchrzak on Saturday to open his campaign.
View the full doubles draw
Rivals Daniil Medvedev and Learner Tien are also teaming up in the desert, with the unlikely pair set to face cousins Arthur Rinderknech and Valentin Vacherot in the first round. Other notable first-round matchups include Felix Auger-Aliassime and Sebastian Korda vs. Marcelo Melo and Alexander Zverev, Karen Khachanov and Andrey Rublev vs. sixth seeds Hugo Nys and Edouard Roger-Vasselin, and Emilio Nava and Ben Shelton vs. Alejandro Davidovich Fokina and Arthur Fils.
Your data will be used in accordance with the
ATP Privacy Policy
and
WTA Privacy Policy.
Get official marketing communications from the ATP and WTA! We'll send you newsletters keeping you informed about news, tournaments, competitions, ticketing, partner offers and more.
Your data will be used in accordance with the
ATP Privacy Policy
and
WTA Privacy Policy.
© Copyright 1994 - 2026 ATP Tour, Inc. All Rights Reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any way or by any means (including photocopying, recording or storing it in any medium by electronic means), without the written permission of ATP Tour, Inc.. Terms & Conditions | Privacy | Community Social Media Policy | Modern Slavery Statement | Feedback | Cookies | Your Privacy Choices
Diane Parry edged the seven-time Grand Slam champion 6-3, 6-7(4), 6-1, but Venus Williams' return to Stadium 1 -- nearly three decades after her first Indian Wells appearance -- drew the kind of appreciation reserved for a player whose impact reaches far beyond the result.
INDIAN WELLS -- As she sauntered, positively regal, onto the vast Stadium 1 court, Venus Williams smiled as the applause swelled around her.
At the age of 45 -- she turns 46 in June -- naturally, Williams isn't the tennis player she once was, but that hardly matters. Neither did Thursday's 6-3, 6-7 (4), 6-1 first-round loss to qualifier Diane Parry.
Venus, sporting a stylish Lacoste white sleeveless top and shorts, gave her a good go, staging numerous in-game comebacks and acquitting herself quite well against the No. 111-ranked player on the WTA Tour Driven by Mercedes-Benz. Parry, incidentally, advanced to last year's third round at both Wimbledon and the US Open.
This was Williams' 110th main-draw appearance at a Tier 1/WTA 1000 event, equaling Francesca Schiavone for the sixth most of any player since the tier format's introduction in 1990. She's the second-oldest player to play a Tier 1/1000 event, after 47-year-old Martina Navratilova (Charleston, 2004).
Going back to her first appearance at Indian Wells in 1996, Venus' run here spans a full three decades. The seven-time Grand Slam champion remains a one-name icon, an ambassador to the sport with a long record of social conscience.
Older fans will remember the glittering triumphs, particularly at Wimbledon and the US Open. The younger ones in attendance might not appreciate the spark of popularity Venus and younger sister Serena brought to women's tennis at the turn of the century.
Her greatest legacy -- and Venus confirms this -- was her instrumental role in convincing the All England Club to offer equal prize money to men and women in 2007. She lobbied behind the scenes and, memorably, in an essay in The Times of London, asking poignantly, “How can it be that Wimbledon finds itself on the wrong side of history?”
It was wonderfully appropriate when, after winning in 2007 (her fourth of five titles there), she received that first equal paycheck.
Williams has a lot going on in her life. She married Andrea Preti in 2025 and oversees thriving businesses in interior design and fashion. She also happens to love tennis, which is why she's still out there, playing a light schedule since her last full-time season in 2019.
Some might wonder why? It just might be the jolt of adrenaline that surges through her when she hits a winner, or the crowd murmur that builds into roars when she's taking control of a point. To see her patting her thigh with intensity and swaying slightly from side to side as she contemplates a break point return is to understand that it still means something.
She's 0-5 for the year after this 2-hour and 21-minute match but, again, that's not the point.
In his cherished song “Glory Days,” Bruce Springsteen laments in the chorus “Glory days … They'll pass you by, glory days … In the wink of a young girl's eye.”
Credit to Venus for finding a way to relive and recapture some of those golden moments -- and sharing them with her tribute-paying forever fans. At one point, after another one of her thunderous forehands -- a winner into the open court -- Venus turned to the crowd and raised a fist.
She was smiling -- and so was everyone in the stadium.
Diane Parry edged the seven-time Grand Slam champion 6-3, 6-7(4), 6-1, but Venus Williams' return to Stadium 1 -- nearly three decades after her first Indian Wells appearance -- drew the kind of appreciation reserved for a player whose impact reaches far beyond the result.
Mary Carillo, the Emmy-winning broadcaster and former player who won the 1977 Roland Garros mixed doubles title with John McEnroe, shared the news at Indian Wells as fans wrote “Letters of Greatness” to this year's inductees.
INDIAN WELLS -- A woman with a lone Grand Slam mixed doubles title (with John McEnroe at 1977 Roland Garros), will be welcomed into the International Tennis Hall of Fame late this summer -- alongside the great Roger Federer, he of 20 Grand Slam singles titles.
“When you think of Rog … “ Mary Carillo began, making a goofy face.
“You think of Mary Carillo,” her interviewer responded, drawing a series of world-class signature cackles from the future enshrinee.
Her career-high ranking in singles was No. 33, but as an astute, breezy analyst for numerous outlets, including ESPN, Tennis Channel and NBC, Carillo made the game more accessible. Also, an award-winning writer and reporter, particularly at the Olympics, Carillo, 68, will go in under the contributor category.
She made a point of naming most of the Hall's female contributors, as well as some of the male sportswriters.
“I'm very happy to be among these people,” Carillo said.
The occasion at the BNP Paribas Open was the Hall of Fame's “Letters of Greatness” celebration, an initiative that began last year when Maria Sharapova and Bob and Mike Brian were enshrined in Newport, Rhode Island.
Fans here at Indian Wells write notes to their incoming HOF heroes. They'll be compiled and displayed as part of the enshrinement ceremonies in August.
“It's one of the tools we use to bring fans and the next generation closer to our legends,” explained Dan Faber, CEO of the International Tennis Hall of Fame.
One read: “Mary, great announcing and hosting those tennis tournaments. And your Olympic reporting was interesting and fun. -- Crazy Shelly.
In addition to Hall of Famers Tracy Austin and the Bryan Brothers, Patrick McEnroe -- the institution's president since 2023 -- was on hand.
“Yes,” Carillo said, “they'll be crawling with Douglastonians in Newport!”
Indeed, Carillo and the McEnroe brothers all hail from Douglaston, Queens, New York. John McEnroe, a seven-time major singles champion, was enshrined in 1999. The Douglaston Club was where they all learned to play tennis.
“Five tennis courts, a swimming pool -- and three bowling lanes,” Carillo remembered proudly. “And I worked at the snack bar and as a waitress. I was making $1.85 an hour -- no tipping.”
And then Carillo channeled a classic John McEnroe tag line.
“I did not see this coming,” Carillo said. “I mean, who the hell would see this coming? Come on, let's be serious.”
Mary Carillo, the Emmy-winning broadcaster and former player who won the 1977 Roland Garros mixed doubles title with John McEnroe, shared the news at Indian Wells as fans wrote “Letters of Greatness” to this year's inductees.
Authentics
Store
Tickets
Hospitality
Experiences
Previous
Current
Upcoming
P1 Piastri expecting everyone ‘to find a big step overnight' ahead of Qualifying
‘We seem to be on the back foot' – Leclerc wary of Mercedes threat in Australia
Starting this weekend, Apple TV subscribers in the US can watch all practice, Qualifying, and Sprint sessions, along with races, as the 2026 Formula 1 season roars into gear.
Apple TV subscribers in the US will be able to watch all practice, Qualifying, Sprint sessions and Grands Prix across the 2026 season, starting with this weekend's action in Australia.
As the new exclusive US home of Formula 1, Apple TV is the place for US fans to watch every Grand Prix live and on demand, all season long.
Fans can follow Formula 1 on Apple TV and explore an extensive collection of curated programming at apple.co/f1onappletv.
“This weekend marks the start of a new era for Formula 1 fans in the US,” said Eddy Cue, Apple's senior vice president of Services. “We're excited to bring every moment of the season to Apple TV, delivering an immersive experience designed entirely around fans. Formula 1's growth in America has been extraordinary, and we're proud to build on that momentum – combining the power of Apple TV with the broader Apple ecosystem to create even more ways for fans to connect with the sport.”
“As we begin this exciting chapter for our sport with new teams, cars, engines, and drivers, it is the perfect time to welcome Apple as our broadcaster in the United States,” said Stefano Domenicali, Formula 1's President and CEO.
“We have an important journey ahead of us, one we'll share in a country where the passion for F1 continues to grow with extraordinary energy. We are two global brands with the same ambition: to always strive for excellence, to boldly innovate, and to deliver thrilling experiences. I am sure our American fans will appreciate not only the intensity and spectacle of our races, but also the quality and coverage they'll have available. Throughout the season, they'll be able to experience every moment on Apple TV, feeling even closer to the action, the teams, and the protagonists of this unique sport.”
Viewers tuning in to F1 will enjoy a true front-row experience, with comprehensive coverage and analysis, expansive programming, and every Grand Prix with 5.1 surround sound – and, for the first time ever for F1 viewers, in stunning 4K with Dolby Vision.
Coverage of every Grand Prix will feature English and Spanish commentary, along with access to up to 30 additional live feeds across all sessions. These include Driver Tracker for a bird's-eye view of the race; real-time telemetry and timing; a mixed onboard feed that automatically switches between onboard cameras as the race unfolds; and podium feeds that dynamically follow the drivers running in P1, P2, and P3 throughout.
Viewers can follow every moment of the race with a Multiview experience, watching up to four live feeds at once. They can easily get started with a one-tap, preconfigured Multiview layout for every team, or if they prefer even more personalisation, they can customise their own Multiview and choose which feeds they'd like to follow.
Viewers will also have access to Sky Sports broadcasts, providing another way to enjoy every race weekend.
Apple TV subscribers can explore curated collections of programming covering everything they need to know heading into the 2026 season, including rule changes, new cars, team updates, the full race calendar, and the most exciting moments from last season. If they miss a session, they can catch up anytime with full replays, highlights, and Race in 30 – all spoiler-free.
F1 TV Premium – Formula 1's premier direct-to-consumer offering – remains available exclusively in the US through Apple TV and is included at no additional cost for subscribers. On Apple TV, iPad, and iPhone, subscribers can also access Formula 2, Formula 3, F1 ACADEMY, and Porsche Supercup events through the F1 TV app using their Apple TV subscription.
For the first time, Formula 1: Drive to Survive will be available to stream on both Netflix and Apple TV, as Season 8 takes viewers through the thrills, shake-ups, and triumphs of the 2025 FIA Formula One World Championship.
Whether the viewer is a casual fan who fell in love with Formula 1 through Drive to Survive or a die-hard enthusiast tuning in to each race weekend throughout the year, they'll find even more ways to engage with the sport through this collaboration between Apple TV and Netflix. Released just last week ahead of the 2026 F1 season, this latest chapter gives fans a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the 2025 campaign – a year that saw plenty of action unfold both on and off the track.
Drive to Survive will be available for US fans to enjoy with an Apple TV subscription throughout the entire season. Additionally, the 2026 Canadian Grand Prix, beginning May 22, will stream on Apple TV and Netflix in the US.
Next Up
© 2003-2026 Formula One World Championship Limited
Authentics
Store
Tickets
Hospitality
Experiences
Previous
Current
Upcoming
P1 Piastri expecting everyone ‘to find a big step overnight' ahead of Qualifying
‘We seem to be on the back foot' – Leclerc wary of Mercedes threat in Australia
Please wait, loading video...
Chief Designer Rob Marshall confident McLaren are ‘in the fight' in Australia
TECH TALK – Who's got the best mods in Melbourne?
FP2 Highlights: 2026 Australian Grand Prix
FP1 Highlights: 2026 Australian Grand Prix
2026 Australian GP: Weekend Warm-Up
Radio Rewind: 2025 Australian Grand Prix
© 2003-2026 Formula One World Championship Limited
Authentics
Store
Tickets
Hospitality
Experiences
Previous
Current
Upcoming
P1 Piastri expecting everyone ‘to find a big step overnight' ahead of Qualifying
‘We seem to be on the back foot' – Leclerc wary of Mercedes threat in Australia
Following a tough pre-season for the team, Alex Albon has explained where he thinks Williams will place in the pecking order at the start of 2026.
Alex Albon believes that Williams will find themselves in the “bottom half of the midfield” entering into 2026, with the Thai racer conceding that the team's car “needs to go on a diet” as a priority.
Off the back of a strong P5 finish in last year's Teams' Championship, Williams have faced a tougher start to this year's campaign, having been the only squad to miss the Barcelona Shakedown in January due to delays in the FW48 programme.
While they went on to record decent mileage during the two pre-season tests in Bahrain, the Grove-based outfit seemed to be lacking in performance compared to some of their rivals, with their 2026 challenger currently overweight.
As such, Albon offered a modest assessment during Thursday's media day ahead of the Australian Grand Prix about where Williams stand following testing.
“I think that realistically, we're going to be at the bottom half of the midfield,” the 29-year-old said. “We've got our work cut out. It's clear where a lot of the performance is – it's no secret that we're overweight, but we have a clear plan.
“The next few races are just about optimising. I feel like there's a lot of opportunity in these races where the regulations are still so new and reliability is still a question mark.
“There are still points on the table if everything goes right and we execute on our side. That's how I view it. We're maybe not where we want to be, not at the speed we had last year, but I think we'll get there.”
Despite his optimism that things will improve, Albon also acknowledged that it has been “tough” to cope with the drop off in performance.
“It's tough for myself but it's tough for the whole team,” he explained. “I think we take it as a group. It's been frustrating but it's not from lack of effort from the team or anyone at Grove.
“It's challenged us, these new regulations and this new car build. We are on the back foot, but we've done it before and we'll do it again.”
Focusing on the team's short-term priorities and possibilities, Albon admitted that reducing the car's weight is the initial goal before they take stock of everything else.
“The car needs to go on a diet, and then it's just around analysing our concepts in terms of aero philosophies,” the Williams driver said. “Do we think we've gone the right way? Do we need to reassess?
“I think Mercedes are the clear strong ones in our heads for now, and they look a little bit different to us so we'll maybe have a look at that. For now, none of these things are going to happen overnight. We just need to optimise what we have.
“Reliability down the paddock is going to be a big question mark – it is a new regulation, after all, so if we can get some points for free… Realistically going into this weekend, if everyone finishes then I'm not sure points are in the cards for us, but with reliability, who knows?”
Next Up
© 2003-2026 Formula One World Championship Limited
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The movie “Heel” was formerly titled “Good Boy” in 2025 until another movie called “Good Boy” — that one about a dog trying to protect his beloved owner from malevolent forces — forced a name change but compelled just as much genre acclaim. The latest film from Polish filmmaker Jan Komasa follows a 19-year-old degenerate raver from London who, in the last gasp of an all-time bender, is kidnapped by Stephen Graham and chained up in the basement of a posh estate. It's also about a troubled young man en route to redemption, not unlike Komasa's Oscar-nominated film from 2020 “Corpus Christi.”
The why behind the kidnapping is teased with somewhat overplayed narrative breadcrumbs throughout this 110-minute movie that has the spirit of Greek New Wave cinema (from Yorgos Lanthimos to the metastasizing family toxicity of an early days entry like “Miss Violence,” which you should absolutely seek out if you want to feel really sick). Yet “Heel” could've benefited from the economy of filmmaking usually seen from that collective; a snippier edit would've really helped tighten the noose — excuse me, collar. “Anniversary” director Komasa, though, brings enough visual polish to the material to keep you in the palm of his hand.
Popular on IndieWire
Related Stories ‘André Is an Idiot' Review: Get a F**king Colonoscopy! Jena Malone and Robin Tunney Hit the Road in Dreamy Jennifer Reeder-Directed Music Video for Malone' ‘Barstow'
The reasoning behind Tommy's (Anson Boon, in a strong breakout performance from the once-younger “1917” actor) captivity in a stranger's dank cellar, where meant-to-be-soothing nature sounds blare from a boombox but grow tantamount to dripping water torture, turns out to be fairly standard, plucked from your basic family-trauma rosebush. But where “Heel” is most unexpected is in the complex tangle of feelings that take form between the reedy, urchin-like Tommy (whom it turns out comes from a rather stable middle-class home) and his “found family,” i.e., captors, played by Graham and an always freaky Andrea Riseborough.
Tommy is a party animal with a penchant for oversharing on social media — and overdoing it not only on drugs and alcohol but in the pain he wants to inflict on others. He careens through London's nightlife in a blackout stupor early in the film, only to awake in a basement belonging to Chris (Graham, in a totally different and creepy mode compared to “Adolescence”) and Kathryn (Riseborough, shellshocked by past scars, but with eventually more agency than you'd expect), whom her husband keeps calling “princess.” They won't tell Tommy why he's there, but any willfulness is met with a firm beating and Chris putting him down, saying “bad boy, bad boy, bad boy” as he pelts him with a billy club.
They also have a small son, Jonathan (Kit Rakusen), who offers Tommy the only shred of humanity of the lot. Inevitably “tamed,” or at least calmed down, Chris allows Tommy to live more freely in the upstairs quarters, with the dog collar and chains around his neck outfitted to an elaborate pulley system on the ceilings. They surprise him on his birthday with a picnic al fresco; is he actually starting to warm to these people, these people who keep a bell affixed to him at all times, or has he been brainwashed?
Once it becomes clear that Tommy is not the first victim of Chris and Kathryn's scheme, and that family trauma might have something to do with it, he plots an escape. But what is Tommy going home to? The script, penned by Bartek Bartosik and Naqqash Khalid, becomes bizarrely moralistic by the end, insinuating that the debased and debauched might perhaps see their problems solved by becoming domesticated. That's one way to read the film, anyway, other than as an entertaining kind of hostage thriller about an extremely dysfunctional family. There's a “funny” moment when Tommy nearly chokes himself to death trying to steal a knife from a kitchen drawer while Chris and Kathryn slow-dance to “Smoke Gets in Your Eyes” by The Platters out on the terrace.
Graham and Riseborough are predictably strong and uniquely unsettling in roles that both play off and stretch their comfort zones. But it's Boon as Tommy, who begins the movie as a real prick, a scallywag, and ends up a pretty sensitive chap, who arrives as something of a revelation. With any less capable actor in his shoes, he could not sell the inherent ridiculousness (and eventual cliches) of the premise and the part. You might wish “Heel” were a bit funnier, a bit scarier, a bit more twisted, but it's still pungently creepy in the right ways and anchored by a suite of top-tier actors capable of wringing empathy out of the darkest Freudian corners of a fucked-up family.
“Heel” premiered at the 2025 Toronto International Film Festival. Magnolia Pictures releases it in select theaters on Friday, March 6, 2026.
Want to stay up to date on IndieWire's film reviews and critical thoughts? Subscribe here to our newly launched newsletter, In Review by David Ehrlich, in which our Chief Film Critic and Head Reviews Editor rounds up the best new reviews and streaming picks along with some exclusive musings — all only available to subscribers.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
By
Nikki McCann Ramirez
Donald Trump's administration can't seem to agree on the scope, length, or endgame of their military offensive against Iran, or even if the operations are actually a war. Amid growing international chaos over the devastating offensive, it doesn't seem like the president fully appreciates the gravity of the situation.
Trump has continued posting about election conspiracy theories and rambling about renovating the White House as Americans have sought answers about the war, while official government accounts post supercut videos equating the war to something out of a movie or video game. When Time magazine recently asked Trump whether Americans should be worried about the possibility of retaliatory attacks in the United States, the president essentially shrugged.
“I guess,” Trump said. “We think about it all the time. We plan for it. But yeah, you know, we expect some things. Like I said, some people will die. When you go to war, some people will die.”
Popular on Rolling Stone
Inspiring stuff from the commander in chief.
Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's Lord Farquaad-esque “some of you may die” attitude toward potential American casualties has been a through line since strikes began last week. Trump mused about his golden curtains during a White House event in which he discussed American casualties. Hegseth has repeatedly minimized the deaths of six American service members as the cost of warfare, and he suggested that more deaths are expected before the “war” ends. On Wednesday, he berated members of the press for reporting on the deaths, accusing them of wanting to “make the president look bad.”
“War” itself has become a term of contention. The administration has waffled about whether its military operations against Iran are quick, targeted strikes, a short-term offense, or an all-out war with no end date in sight. They have yet to provide a coherent reason as to why it was even necessary, nor have they offered consistent objectives. In a Truth Social post today, Trump wrote that “there will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”
Trending Stories
BTS Release Comeback Live Trailer: ‘Seven Together, We Can Do Anything'
Ann and Nancy Wilson Recall Heart's 1970s Implosion: ‘Emotional Toll Just Kind of Ate Us'
Harry Styles Is Up for Anything on 'Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally.'
Young Conservatives Are, Once Again, Being Racist in the Group Chat
“After that, and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before. IRAN WILL HAVE A GREAT FUTURE. ‘MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN (MIGA!),'” Trump wrote.
It appears the U.S. is now in the midst of another regime change, nation-shaping project, but Iran presents a much more formidable enemy ruled by a far-less cooperative regime than what Trump has encountered in Venezuela or elsewhere. The regime has already spread the conflict throughout most of the Arabian Peninsula, and now, according to the president at least, the regime or its allies may pose a direct threat to Americans at home.
We want to hear it. Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Rolling Stone is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Rolling Stone, LLC. All rights reserved.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
While the Ryan Murphy-produced and Connor Hines-created FX anthology series “Love Story” has punctured the pop cultural consciousness with its first offering, “Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette,” at least one of the very real people it chronicles has plenty to say about just how true the whole thing is. (In a word: not.)
In a startling new op-ed in the New York Times, actress and philanthropist Daryl Hannah takes the FX series to task for its inaccurate portrayal of her. Hannah famously dated Kennedy before he met Bessette, and Hannah is played in the show by Dree Hemingway in a recurring role.
“The character ‘Daryl Hannah' portrayed in the series is not even a remotely accurate representation of my life, my conduct or my relationship with John,” Hannah wrote in the piece, published on Friday morning. “The actions and behaviors attributed to me are untrue. I have never used cocaine in my life or hosted cocaine-fueled parties. I have never pressured anyone into marriage. I have never desecrated any family heirloom or intruded upon anyone's private memorial. I have never planted any story in the press. I never compared Jacqueline Onassis' death to a dog's.”
Popular on IndieWire
Related Stories How ‘Vladimir' Author Julia May Jonas Adapted Her Novel for Netflix and Rachel Weisz: Think ‘Age of Innocence' for Sex-Crazed Academics The Stars of ‘Deli Boys' Explain the Different Types of Excitement They Felt Before Filming Seasons 1 and 2
Hannah continues, “It's appalling to me that I even have to defend myself against a television show. These are not creative embellishments of personality. They are assertions about conduct — and they are false.”
Early reviews of the series, including ours from Ben Travers, pointed out some of the more galling characterizations of Hannah within the show. Travers wrote in his review that Hannah “could win a defamation case based on how much this show hates her.”
For Hannah, the real-world fallout has already been intense. She wrote, “When so many people watch a dramatization that uses a real name, real-life consequences follow. In the weeks since the series aired, I have received many hostile and even threatening messages from viewers who seem to believe the portrayal is factual. When entertainment borrows a real person's name, it can permanently impact her reputation.”
In the op-ed, Hannah also cautioned against viewers believing everything they see on their screens, noting that “the Kennedy family is also notoriously private, and I have always honored their right to privacy. Know that most (if not all) of those claiming to have any intimate knowledge of our personal lives are self-serving sensationalists trading in gossip, innuendo and speculation.”
You can read Hannah's full op-ed right here.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
By Nellie Andreeva
Editor-In-Chief
EXCLUSIVE: Garfield is making a TV return. Paramount+ has picked up a new original 2D-animated series featuring the iconic lasagna-loving orange cat. Voicing Garfield is Emmy-winning actor-comedian Lamorne Morris (Fargo) in a casting that will make Morris' New Girl feline co-star Ferguson proud.
Tentatively titled Garfield, the series, from Nickelodeon Animation Studios, is inspired by Jim Davis' original comic strip and features the chonky feline at his finest, most sarcastic and lackadaisical. Dave H. Johnson (Middlemost Post) and John Trabbic III (SpongeBob SquarePants, Middlemost Post) serve as executive producers.
Related Stories
News
Paramount+ Returns To Reality With Relationship Series 'Making Love' From Kinetic Content
Casting
Taylor Sheridan's 'Frisco King' Casts Asa Germann, Kai Caster, Lilah Pate & Savanna Gann As Series Regulars
This pickup of Garfield, which is currently in production, brings to an end the project's lengthy road to the screen. It started back in 2019 — two Paramount mergers and regimes ago — when Nickelodeon's then-parent Viacom acquired the IP to the cartoon from owners Paws and announced the development of a new Garfield animated series.
Watch on Deadline
Under the agreement, Paramount predecessor Viacom also took over managing the global merchandising rights to the property. Since then, the Garfield character has been integrated into the Paramount Products & Experiences portfolio across categories spanning apparel, toys, publishing, food, pets and more, including such Nickelodeon game franchises as All-Star Brawl and Kart Racers, in which the Mondays-loathing cat was voiced by Frank Welker.
Meanwhile, the animated series has taken awhile to come together, spending seven years in development and production.
It is the first Garfield animated series since Paws' 2009 The Garfield Show, which ran for five seasons on Cartoon Network/Boomerang in the U.S. with Welker voicing the title character.
Separately, there is Alcon/Sony's Garfield 3D CGI animation feature franchise with Chris Pratt as the voice of the tabby cat. The first film, The Garfield Movie, was released in 2024; plans for a sequel, with Pratt reprising his role were announced last year. It is moving forward.
Since its launch in 1978, Davis' syndicated comic strip has chronicled the life of the eponymous cat, his owner Jon Arbuckle and Odie the dog, as well as various friends. The brand currently counts over 200 million daily comic readers and millions of social media followers.
Garfield marks the latest new series pickup at Paramount+ by the streamer's new post Skydance-Paramount merger team led by Cindy Holland, Paramount's Chair of Direct-to-Consumer, and Paramount+‘s Head of Originals Jane Wiseman.
In the kids and family space, it joins the recently ordered animated series The Elephant & Piggie Show! and The Pigeon Show! Starring the Pigeon from Mo Willems' Hidden Pigeon Company.
From Nickelodeon Animated Studios, Paramount+ has the upcoming film The Legend of Aang: The Last Airbender, originally targeted for a theatrical release, and the 2D series Avatar: Seven Havens, ordered by Nickelodeon a year ago, both with Nick Animation banner Avatar Studios.
On the live-action side, over the last few months, Paramount+ has ordered legal drama Discretion starring Nicole Kidman and Elle Fanning, as well as limited series 9/12, headlined by Jeremy Strong, and Fear Not, starring Anne Hathaway. The streamer also formalized the pickup of Tulsa King spinoff Frisco King, toplined by Samuel L. Jackson, which had been in the works as NOLA King.
While original drama series is Paramount+'s focus on the live-action side, it plans to be opportunistic in unscripted, starting with the pickup this week of dating show Making Love. The streamer also has the upcoming four-part docuseries Made for March designed to complement CBS and Paramount+'s 2026 March Madness basketball coverage.
Morris has a history sharing the screen with a feline; his character on New Girl Winston Bishop was known for his close bond with his beloved cat, Ferguson.
An Emmy for his role on Season 5 of FX's Fargo, Morris will next be seen starring opposite Nicolas Cage in Prime Video's Spider-Noir and is currently in production on Jumanji 4. He also co-hosts The Lamorning After podcast with Kyle Shevrin and the New Girl rewatch podcast, The Mess Around, with former castmate Hannah Simone. Morris is repped by CAA, Entertainment 360 and Myman Greenspan.
Get our Breaking News Alerts and Keep your inbox happy.
Comments On Deadline Hollywood are monitored. So don't go off topic, don't impersonate anyone, and don't get your facts wrong.
Comment
Name
Email
Website
Δ
This is awesome!!! Love these guys. This is gonna be great.
Do you make butter sculputures for state fairs?
Signup for Breaking News Alerts & Newsletters
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get our latest storiesin the feed of your favorite networks
We want to hear from you! Send us a tip using our annonymous form.
Sign up for our breaking news alerts
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Deadline is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Deadline Hollywood, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
When the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences picks its top film (a little something called “Best Picture”) next Sunday at the Oscars, the group's sprawling membership will seal the fate of one film forever. Best Picture status is something special (if not always lovingly remembered and fondly agreed-upon), but it also sometimes ensures that film fans forget about all the other competitors nominated alongside the ultimate winner.
After all, there have been over 650 films nominated for the arguably highest accolade in the film world. Quick: name them! No, no, that's not necessary. But while that means there's a very big pool of allegedly great films (good enough to rank among a given year's best!) out there, most people really only care about the winner.
Before the Oscars bestow its greatest honor on what will become the 98th Best Picture winner in history, we here at IndieWire like to engage in a traditional pastime: ranking every single of this year's Best Picture nominees. Some will be remembered, some will be forgotten, some might not even belong here (arguably, as ever), and only one will win. And, unlike at the Oscars, there's space here for runners-up and also-rans aplenty.
As we muse each year, it's too soon to tell how well these 10 films will be remembered in the annals of cinematic history, though there are a handful, as you'll see on our ranking, that already feel close to icon. Below, IndieWire ranks the 10 Best Picture nominees from worst to best.
Imagine if Michael Haneke's “Funny Games” were instead about a pair of lone-wolf, conservationist vigilantes trying to save the world instead of two sociopathic twinks wanting to tear it down, and you'll have some idea of the hyper-contained, rigorously controlled torture chamber that is Yorgos Lanthimos' “Bugonia.” Jesse Plemons stars as a galaxy-brained conspiracist beekeeper who's either severely mentally ill or the only prophet among us, hijacking his cousin (Aidan Delbis) into a scheme to kidnap a big pharma executive (Emma Stone) whom he believes to be a body-snatched alien sent to end the planet.
Scripted by “The Menu” writer Will Tracy, “Bugonia” feels like both the apotheosis and the nadir of Lanthimos' aesthetic and his collaborations with Emma Stone. Its claustrophobically conspiratorial worldview elicits not a change in hearts or minds but a feeling of tell us something we don't know. There's also a rinse-and-repeat effect post-“Kinds of Kindness” of familiar terrain about the cultish groundswells that form around a figure of power we are meant to be very, very afraid of. From the detached arm's length the filmmaker keeps from his subjects to the even more detached camera: Yorgos, Emma, it's time to shake up the schtick. At least there were no fish-eye lenses this time. —RL
Listen, the cheapest of ways to “review” a film or baseline evaluate its merit is to compare it to another film like it, or a film that should be like it, or a film that you wanted it to be but it's somehow not. But this isn't a review, not in the traditional sense, at least, so we're going to get a little cheap here. “F1” is not “Top Gun: Maverick.” I wish it was. But, then again, I tend to wish most of our biggest, splashiest, vroom-vroom-iest blockbusters were.
Mostly, it's fun that Joseph Kosinski's latest big-budget spectacle even snuck into this category, especially without the sorts of other nominations we might expect for a BP contender (as in: writing, directing, or acting). Still, the film is a darling below the line, complete with noms for editing, visual effects, and sound. Should those elements be in consideration for a Best Picture? Damn right, but this is not the best film of that ilk to prove that theory.
It's the most obvious “blockbuster!” of the bunch, and that's truly no dig against it. But it's just not “Top Gun: Maverick,” and for all its impressive elements (and a pretty natty ability to make audiences understand and care about Formula-1 racing), it still feels like the film plucked to occupy a certain kind of slot in the field. —KE
Guillermo del Toro's version of “Frankenstein,” a big, juicy, glossy, expensive mounting of the Mary Shelley classic novel for Netflix, lacks the voiciness, the edge, the perverse streak of del Toro's great run of films from the ‘90s and into the early aughts, from “Cronos” and “Mimic” to “The Devil's Backbone” and “Pan's Labyrinth.” The kindly, curious Mexican auteur has made fairytales, the stuff of the heart-rending and primal in terms of our need for love and perhaps a storybook ending — other than “Nightmare Alley,” which smacked of his wunderkind nihilistic streak, despite its shortcomings — his career calling-card in recent years, whether “Pinocchio” or Best Picture winner “The Shape of Water.”
That the majority of what you see in “Frankenstein” isn't AI- or computer-generated, del Toro's backdrops populated with living people behind and in front of the camera, is worth its own celebration. Despite all that stagecraft, you want to compel del Toro to go weirder, darker, rather than reverential, as his film promises to be the most faithful yet to Shelley's book. Which was weird, which was dark, and which has resisted cinematic reverence.
This “Frankenstein” doesn't leave you with the feeling that anything was creatively risked (other than, of course, the monumental task of putting together a massive film set with real crew hand-making the thing from top to toe, cinematographer Dan Laustsen and production designer Tamara Deverell among them). Or that del Toro ever hit his head on some kind of artistic ceiling. If you want your del Toro weirder, “Frankenstein” might not be your cup. Hey, it's better than “The Bride!” —RL
We're of the (increasingly unoriginal, and blessedly so) mind that Joachim Trier has not yet made a bad film. And while the ecstatic rush of something like “The Worst Person in the World” is hard to beat, even by its own maker and star, Trier and actress Renate Reinsve's follow-up comes close, in much quieter terms.
A family drama wrapped up in some winking Hollywood horse-trading (surely, Trier took a few meetings from streamers in recent years, and was likely just as baffled by them as Stellan Skarsgård, here cast as a lauded filmmaker on the upswing, suddenly). At its heart, however, “Sentimental Value” is about the damage we do to each other (mentally, emotionally, and even architecturally, as we see in the film's final sequence, a contender for best of the year). Can that ever be undone? Ah, perhaps movie-making can help.
Uniformly strong performances from the film's enviable cast (Skarsgård, Reinsve, Elle Fanning, and one of the year's most astonishing breakouts, Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas) would typically bill this one as some sort of “actor's showcase,” but they are all deep-feeling and true that such monikers feel limp. It's more an emotional showcase, and a thrilling one at that. —KE
In the final gasping hours of this year's seemingly endless awards season, there seems to be a low-key reevaluation happening of “Marty Supreme,” which blew the roof off the New York Film Festival secret screening and drummed up mega holiday box office. Is Timothée Chalamet's brazenly selfish, chaotically opportunistic Marty Mauser really that unlikable? Did Chalamet's palpable hunger to win an Oscar come off as strained, with promo moments atop the Vegas Dome or starring in his own rap videos, or even saying at last year's SAG that he wanted to be “one of the greats,” costing him the prize?
For the sickos and the perverts, “Marty Supreme” is a lot of fun, and amply well-crafted thanks to 1950s New York production by Jack Fisk (who has never won an Oscar!) anchored by a real tactility. Gwyneth Paltrow is fantastic as a drying-up theater actress making one last desperate bid for attention, and another victim of Marty's chicanery. Odessa A'Zion, with about as much screaming and hysteria as a number of this years Best Actress contenders, makes a winning case for more messy big-screen roles.
A California Post report about the filmmaker and his brother Benny's past dealings during the making of “Good Time,” in which an underage actress was allegedly made uncomfortable by a sex scene, might have had an impact, too. But frankly, “Marty Supreme” is going to be a classic for all time, now and down the line, and especially as the kind of movie Letterboxd fuckboys paper a poster of on their dorm room wall. —RL
Nearly six months on from its fall festival debut, we encourage everyone to remember the first blush of feeling upon witnessing the film (our own David Ehrlich called Chloé Zhao's film “unspeakably devastating” out of Telluride, which is the notion I took into my TIFF screening a week later). We know that awards season is long (so, so long) and that it's easy to slip into storylines and marketing and whispered rumors by the time we finish Oscar voting, but. Remember how you felt the first time you saw “Hamnet.” Hell, remember how you felt the first time you saw any of the films in this batch.
For some, that feeling might not do anything to dilute how you think of the film now. For me? Such an exercise pushes me right back into an extraordinary emotional experience that, yes, ultimately ended with a touch of devastation. The story of Zhao's latest is a bit of a misdirect — what happened to the Shakespeare family after beloved youngest child Hamnet died and also how did it lead directly to the creation of The Bard's “Hamlet”? — as this lush, magical film is really about the feelings behind that story. See what I did there?
That star Jessie Buckley has essentially run the table when it comes to this year's Best Actress race (it most recently calls to mind Kieran Culkin's Best Supporting Actor race last year, which never seemed to be in any actual danger) has proven to be one of the most durable plotlines of this season, but that shouldn't obfuscate the true power of the performance, and the entire film. Whatever happens on Oscar Sunday, this one will endure. —KE
Confession time: the first time I saw Clint Bentley's transcendent meditation on death, life, and everything in between, it was on the Sundance Film Festival online app. I had returned home from attending the festival in person and was rapidly catching up on all the must-sees I had missed during my time in Park City, Utah. “Train Dreams” was at the top of my (and seemingly everyone else's) list.
And, yes, I did feel almost instant regret: “Wow, I really wish I had seen this one on the big screen.” But that was soon replaced by something far more rare than regret: actual joy. Bentley's rumination on life in both miniature (through the eyes of a single man, an extraordinary Joel Edgerton) and on the grandest stage possible (it might seem silly or reductive to call this one, ahem, “a transcendent meditation on death, life, and everything in between,” but it fits that bill and then some) is one of the most satisfying films I've seen in quite some time.
That the film would go on to be purchased by Netflix, giving it both a home and guaranteeing that many viewers would see it as I did (on a TV over an internet connection), well, as with so much of what we see in “Train Dreams,” life has a real sense of (dark) humor about most things. But the full might of the streamer — and, of course, the film's uniformly high quality both above and below the line — have kept it in the conversation for over a year now, and the power of that can't be ignored. This is a film about everything and everyone, even if its storyline sounds small. Life itself never is, after all. —KE
Can Ryan Coogler's swampy Southern Gothic vampire tale win it all, and break the glass coffin for genre Best Picture winners at the Oscars? Maybe, baby. The Warner Bros. blockbuster has a record-breaking 16 Oscar nominations, which is nothing to bat at. Michael B. Jordan delivered not one but two terrific performances as identical twins Smoke and Stack, two criminals who return to their hometown in the Jim Crow South to open a bar and be confronted by a metastasizing supernatural evil.
Oscar nominees Wunmi Mosaku and Delroy Lindo, plus Hailee Steinfeld, Miles Caton, Jack O'Connell, and more are all superb as heroes and villains (and sometimes both) in a story that relentlessly keeps the audience in a state of constant unease, sustained by a restless tone shift. If “Sinners” does win Best Picture, it will suggest the Academy has kept apace with mainstream audience tastes; the film, after all, garnered more than $370 million worldwide and is headed for all-timer status. Much of the film (especially its end credits sequence) is quite silly, but that's part of the pleasures of one of 2025's most daring studio movies. —RL
Typically, this annual ranking is the bailiwick of our chief film critic, David Ehrlich, who is currently out on book leave and thus missing the last gasps of this awards season. Still, it only felt right to include him here, and as his review of Paul Thomas Anderson's latest captured nearly everything I wanted to see about the film, an instant classic of the highest order, we'll turn the rest of this entry over to exactly that:
“Vaguely abstracted from Thomas Pynchon's 1984-set ‘Vineland' but eager to reflect a variety of post-Reaganite advancements in ethno-fascism (the action starts in a recognizable today before jumping 16 years forward into a pointedly unchanged tomorrow), this propulsive, hilarious, and overwhelmingly tender paranoid comedy-thriller car chase blockbuster whatever doesn't just stare a broken country in the face with its already prescient tale of immigrant detention centers, white nationalist caricatures, and bullshit pretenses for deploying the military into sanctuary cities. It's also the first movie of its size to accurately crystallize how fucking anxious it feels to be alive right now — to capture the IMAX cartoonishness of our reality and provide a convincing roadmap as to how we might survive it.” —KE
The Brazilians know how to help mount a grassroots Oscar campaign, though of course Neon knew what it had in its hands here. Writer/director Kleber Mendonça Filho's (“Bacurau,” “Aquarius”) saddest movie probably could have only come from the life and mind of someone who began their career as a film critic. This exuberantly crafted film, about a former professor (Best Actor nominee Wagner Moura) adrift and in political crosshairs in Recife in 1977 fascist Brazil, is packed with cinematic references from “Jaws” to “The Omen” and to, conceivably, all of Udo Kier's filmography. Here, he plays a kindly German Jewish tailor in his final role before he died in November 2025, and it's a far cry from the Nazis and vampires and other villains he played throughout his iconic career.
Beyond Moura's both tremendous and emotionally underhanded performance, as well as the trenchant throughline of the relationship between fathers and sons and a nation and its children, “The Secret Agent” also shows us a side of Brazil rarely seen on the big screen — where we're used to seeing Rio or São Paolo and often with a slummy criminal slant. Moura's character goes down in a presumable blaze of glory that's kept offscreen, much like Josh Brolin's death in “No Country for Old Men,” and “The Secret Agent” has that film's subtlety, its sneakiness, a world-weary view that's both running from a past and toward some kind of future. —RL
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
By Matt Grobar
Senior Film Reporter
EXCLUSIVE: Michael Chaves, the filmmaker behind last summer's New Line smash The Conjuring: Last Rites, has enlisted Chris Pine (Carousel) to lead Yeti, a new survival thriller for Netflix that also will star Iona Bell (The Hunger Games: Sunrise on the Reaping), Ray Winstone (Damsel) and Sofia Boutella (Rebel Moon).
Yeti takes place deep in the Alps, where an avalanche has unleashed something primeval from the glacial ice. With no hope of rescue, a father (Pine) and his daughter (Bell) must fight to survive against a merciless predator that blends in with the snow.
The film is being produced under a partnership established in 2021, in which Sony Pictures offers Netflix a first-look at any films it intends to make for streaming. It originated as a spec by Peter Gaffney with rewrites by Sean Tretta. Erik Feig and Jessica Switch are producing for Picturestart, alongside Dan Kagan, with Hans Ritter and Pine exec producing.
Watch on Deadline
Coming off the Sundance premiere of Carousel, a romantic drama where he stars opposite Jenny Slate, Pine just recently entered talks to star opposite Emma Stone in the Universal rom-com The Catch, as we first reported. Upcoming, he'll also be seen in the sci-fi comedy Alpha Gang from filmmakers David and Nathan Zellner. He is repped by CAA, Brillstein Entertainment Partners, and Gendler Kelly & Cunningham.
RELATED: The 60 Movies That Have Made More Than $1 Billion At The Global Box Office
Bell also is coming off a Sundance premiere with Fing!, a family fantasy film in which she stars alongside Taika Waititi and Mia Wasikowska. The young English up-and-comer next will be seen in the role of Lou Lou in Lionsgate's The Hunger Games: Sunrise on the Reaping. She is repped by Mark Jermin Management.
Known for his work in films like The Departed, Sexy Beast, Beowulf and Cold Mountain, Winstone has been in business with Netflix only recently, on the Millie Bobby Brown fantasy flick Damsel — the streamer's 10th most popular film of all time — and the Guy Ritchie series The Gentlemen. He is repped by the UK's Modern Collective.
Recently, Boutella has been seen starring in Zack Snyder's Rebel Moon films for the service, along with Matthew Vaughn's Argylle, The Killer's Game opposite Dave Bautista and the MGM+ series Rogue Heroes. Next up, she'll appear alongside Elizabeth Banks in the genre-bender DreamQuil, premiering at SXSW. She is repped by CAA, Untitled, 42, and Hansen Jacobson Teller.
Chaves is best known for his work inside the Conjuring Universe, on projects including The Curse of La Llorona, The Conjuring: The Devil Made Me Do It, The Nun II and The Conjuring: Last Rites, which broke ground last year as the highest-grossing film in the series, at nearly $500M worldwide. He is repped by CAA and Hirsch Wallerstein Hayum.
Gaffney is repped by Verve and manager Adam Rodin; Tretta by Adventure Media and Behr Abramson Levy Johnson.
Get our Breaking News Alerts and Keep your inbox happy.
Comments On Deadline Hollywood are monitored. So don't go off topic, don't impersonate anyone, and don't get your facts wrong.
Comment
Name
Email
Website
Δ
Signup for Breaking News Alerts & Newsletters
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get our latest storiesin the feed of your favorite networks
We want to hear from you! Send us a tip using our annonymous form.
Sign up for our breaking news alerts
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Deadline is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Deadline Hollywood, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
What's up with conservatives and human trafficking? Perhaps it's a trickle-down terror derived from conspiracies of an international Epsteinian cabal composed of left-center elites. Perhaps it's just a convenient crime to pin on suspicious foreigners. Or maybe it's simply the most evil thing they can imagine, the scariest thing for men who identify as Fathers Of Daughters, the thing that would drive them most quickly to violence. What separates Protector from the QAnon-drenched Sound Of Freedom or the film's obvious inspiration, Taken, is that it's not a father, but a Mother Of A Daughter, who unleashes her particular set of skills upon masses of nefarious henchmen. The other main difference is that the lead isn't played by an otherwise unemployable nut or a graying star slumming it in the genre world. Instead, it's Milla Jovovich who snarls, stabs, and dual-wields her way through this grim copy of a copy, breaking the glass ceiling of who can star in one of these bloodthirsty parental nightmare-fantasies.
Directed by Adrian Grünberg (Rambo: Last Blood, Get The Gringo), Protector fits snugly into the niche he's carved out for himself. His terrible final Rambo movie is almost the same beat-for-beat single-killing-machine rampage against sex traffickers, more explicit in its depiction of Mexico as an alien hellhole but just as explicit in its provocations: What if your teen daughter got snatched because you took your eyes off her for one second? And then she was tortured, injected with heroin, and, despite your most murderous efforts, didn't make it? The only real difference here is that it's all happening to single mom and retired Special Forces supersoldier Nikki (Milla Jovovich), whose daughter Chloe (Isabel Myers) sneaks out one time on her 16th birthday and gets Taken.
Roofied at and snatched from the club—in New Mexico, the only thing scarier than Old Mexico because it's right here in America!—Chloe is hopeless. Thankfully, Nikki is overbearing and guilt-ridden; she missed most of her daughter's birthdays on deployment in the vague Middle East. Now she's just got a few hours to rescue her and prove that she's a great mom. Where Liam Neeson had a downright luxurious 96 hours to find his daughter, Protector shaves a few days off its ticking clock: Nikki has a little less than two days before her daughter is statistically beyond her reach forever.
It's an arbitrary rush, with an added wrinkle from Taken 3, where local law enforcement eventually pursue her as well, because of all the mass-murdering she gets up to. This element is perhaps the most elegant distillation of Protector‘s politics: pro-military, pro-one-man-killer, and anti-police (but only in the context of them trying to stop a vigilante). Protector boasts an ideology so reactionary that any of the cops willing to pursue Nikki—a woman who single-handedly kills a significant percentage of Las Cruces' population over the course of a weekend—are discredited and beaten.
But Jovovich makes the woman this is all in service of into an actual person, against all odds. Caked in blood and coated in bruises, she embodies a jittery and sad shock, suppressed into steel when she's in go-mode, and unleashed into bug-eyed mania when it all finally breaks loose. She can be a cringe-inducing mom who can't understand that her teenager doesn't just want cake and balloons on her birthday, she can be a traumatized soldier, she can be a grieving parent, and she sure as hell can be a weapon. While the action is thoroughly cheap, Jovovich is a seasoned pro at standing out amid the schlock. Apparently during her time in the military, she learned to get very, very good at beating down cartel henchmen who all look exactly like stuntmen.
These stuntmen all work for The Syndicate, the creatively named endpoint for Protector‘s organized crime fearmongering. The Syndicate, of course, is run by The Chairman (Gabriel Sloyer) and his underling (Don Harvey), who should just be named Underling. But Protector doesn't aspire to the mythic cartoonishness of John Wick villains, though the traffickers are caricatures enough that Nikki can be a knife-twisting monster in her own right. Rather, these half-assed character names and plot details read as signs of a half-hearted production, like still-visible numerals in an abandoned paint-by-number picture. When Matthew Modine turns up as Nikki's old military handler, he's just one more stereotype in this feature-length afterthought.
And yet, there's still enough in Protector that's strange or curious enough to stand out among the Taken imitators, though none of it has anything to do with its female-fronted selling point. There's an early time-jump that's a confusing narrative choice, a mid-movie skateboard set piece that's enjoyably odd, and a late twist that's laughably cruel. It's both more and less than “Taken: Mom Edition,” another boneheaded poking of conservative's self-inflicted wounds around human trafficking with a title just as deluded as its content.
Director: Adrian Grünberg
Writer: Bong-Seob Mun
Starring: Milla Jovovich, Isabel Myers, Manny Montana, Michael Stahl-David, Lydia Hull, D.B. Sweeney, Chase E. Kim, Don Harvey, Gabriel Sloyer, Texas Battle, Arica Himmel, Matthew Modine
Release Date: March 6, 2026
Recommended for You1Hijack season 2 reaches its dull destination2Eccentric and uneasy, Heel puts a teen through obedience school3Industry's Myha'la and Marisa Abela on their gutting finale conversation4Ted McGinley steals the show in this week's Shrinking5David Zaslav reaps more benefits of Paramount offer by unloading $114 million of WBD stock
© 2026 Paste Media Group. All Rights Reserved
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Jena Malone might be best known to film fans for her decades-spanning body of acting work (someone who starts with the kind of singular performance a pint-sized Malone put on in the heart-wrenching “Bastard Out of Carolina” is clearly someone formidable), but the star of everything from “The Hunger Games” and “Pride & Prejudice” to “Sucker Punch” and “The Neon Demon” is in possession of another talent: music.
And while real ones surely know that Malone has been making music for nearly two decades, her latest effort seems poised to introduce her to a brand-new fanbase. Malone's new album (her first in over a decade, and the first to be put out only under her name) includes her brand-new single “Barstow,” which you can listen to (and watch!) below, care of dreamy, neon-laced music video directed by Jennifer Reeder and starring Malone and Robin Tunney.
Related Stories Hollywood Honored Two Producers Last Weekend. Only One Represents Its Future. Why Concert Films Like ‘Stray Kids' and ‘EPiC' Are Hot Tickets at the Box Office
The song is the first single of Malone's just-announced new album, “Flowers for Men,” which will be released on May 8 via her own imprint There Was an Old Woman Records. (You can pre-save the album here.) Malone has also announced a run of live shows to support the album, which kicks off in June with a performance at Cafe Du Nord in San Francisco, before stopping in places like Los Angeles, Chicago, Toronto, New York City, and more.
Popular on IndieWire
Fans of the lauded actress' singing will find plenty familiar here amongst the dreamy, synth-y atmosphere, which should also appeal to newcomers to Malone's other big talent.
“It's wild how long I've been making music and how nervous and excited I still am about it all,” Malone told IndieWire. “It's been almost ten years since I released any music, so it's a glorious feeling to feel like a kid again. This album was a long time coming for me for sure. I went through the fire of transformation after having a child and everything asked to be reexamined. I no longer had time to make music like I used to, so I started writing and arranging songs on my iPhone, while I hid in closets and waited in drop-off lines at school. This record emerge from stolen moments.”
The music video, written and directed by Reeder, features a road-tripping Malone who meets (encounters? revisits? choose your own adventure) a kindred spirit along the way, played by Robin Tunney. We won't spoil too much about their bond before you can watch it.
“‘Barstow' is my favorite song on the record. I know it's strange to say that,” she said. “But after I wrote the first draft of the song, it haunted me like no other. Felt like a song I had been longing to write since I was a kid. Jamie Jackson [the producer and co-writer of the record] came in and helped me bring the song to life in such a beautiful way. It was the first song we started with. Some stories/songs are like that. They emerge so potent and emblematic of the record that I knew it had to come out first.”
While the music video marks Malone and Reeder's first collaboration, their simpatico tastes and nature are clear. When asked why she knew Reeder was the first filmmaker for the job, she was effusive. “She was the only pick! I only discovered her work in 2023 and was an instant fan,” Malone said. “Her films ‘Knives and Skin' and ‘Perpetrator' are so fucking incredible. She is so amazing at world making that feels familiar and full of risk! We [met] for an upcoming project and very quickly found the conversation moving to music and art and creations. I sent her an early version of the album and it was just an instant hell yes all around.”
Malone also hailed Reeder's team, including Sevdije Kastrati-Dill (“a batshit crazy talented DP”) and Mike Olenick, Reeder's “incredible long-time editor and colorist.” That excitement also extended to her screen partner, fellow actress (and horror icon) Robin Tunney. Malone said she has long been a fan of “The Craft” star and she loved that their “paths crossed and you get to work and collaborate together and getting to know them lifts their work up higher.”
You can check out the full music video for Malone's “Barstow,” an IndieWire exclusive, below.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
By
Michael Embrich
Shortly after the terrorist attack on the USS Cole in 2000, naval leadership began briefing us about religious fanatics living in the mountains, men who didn't belong to any country or national cause, whose only allegiance was to their interpretation of religion. Al Qaeda.
Those briefings usually ended with an important lesson: The U.S. military is governed by the Constitution, not by any religion. The nation's founders understood the danger religious extremism poses to a democracy. Donald Trump's administration doesn't appear to see it this way as it launches a new war against Iran with no clear objectives or end date.
The non-profit Military Religious Freedom Foundation said this week that it has received over 200 complaints from over 50 military installations that commanders have been invoking Christian rhetoric in describing the war against Iran, much of it pertaining to end-times prophecy. One commander told officers at a briefing on Monday, for example, that Trump was “anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth,” according to one complaint. Independent journalist Jonathan Larsen was the first to report on the military's religious messaging.
Meanwhile, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee is talking about how Israel has a biblical right to take control of most of the Middle East, and Republican politicians are publicly pushing the idea that the United States is now in a holy war with Iran. “This is a religious war,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told reporters this week. “We will determine the course of the Middle East for a thousand years.”
Popular on Rolling Stone
The U.S. military has long been governed by the constitutional separation of church and state, and service members swear an oath to defend the Constitution — not a religion, a prophecy, or a particular interpretation of scripture. The standard has been in jeopardy since Pete Hegseth was chosen to be Secretary of Defense.
Hegseth's rise within conservative politics has long been wrapped in the language of Christian nationalism — literally, as he has a Jerusalem cross, a symbol closely associated with the medieval Crusades, tattooed across his chest, along with other religious imagery. To many historians and observers, these symbols reflect a romanticized vision of Christian warriors fighting holy wars in the Middle East. When someone who publicly embraces that imagery ascends to lead the Department of Defense, it raises serious concerns about whether the line between constitutional duty and religious crusade is being blurred at the highest levels of the military.
Editor's picks
The 250 Greatest Albums of the 21st Century So Far
The 100 Best TV Episodes of All Time
Hegseth has yet to describe the war against Iran in explicitly religious terms, but he's invoked Christianity repeatedly since taking over the nation's military — from reciting “The Lord's Prayer” in front of troops to using the Pentagon's auditorium to host Christian prayer services. His scandal-ridden tenure has been focused largely on eliminating what he calls “DEI” and “woke” ideology from the military, opposing women in combat roles and rolling back recognition of people of color in military history. In February, he invited a Christian nationalist pastor who supports repealing a woman's right to vote to lead one of his prayer services at the Pentagon.
Hegseth's rhetoric around military action has been similarly disturbing. He said this week that the U.S. has been winning the new war on Iran “decisively, devastatingly and without mercy,” and seems to be annoyed that he has to answer questions about the service members who have died as a result of the war. He has also griped about what he called the “stupid rules of engagement,” the kind of rules that keep things like America or its allies from shooting down its own jets. Hegseth's disregard for them is all the more concerning considering he once chanted “Kill all Muslims! Kill all Muslims!” in a “drunk and violent manner,” while he was leading a veterans group, according to a complaint from one of the group's employees.
Related Content
Trump on If Americans Should Be Worried About Retaliatory Attacks at Home: 'I Guess'
Late-Night Hosts Celebrate Trump's Firing of Kristi Noem: ‘Deport Her to El Salvador'
The Terrifying New Era of American Imperialism
Jimmy Kimmel Investigates Trump's Neck Rash by Interviewing His ‘Badly Bruised Baby Hand'
In response to a request for comment about the complaints the Military Religious Freedom Foundation has received since the start of the war against Iran, the Department of Defense directed Rolling Stone to videos of Hegseth speaking about the war, including an address to the military in which he derides America's previous “rudderless wars of hubris” before defending the current war against Iran as lofty music plays behind him.
It shouldn't be a shock to anyone that Trump's War with Iran is going so poorly. It starts from the top. Everything members of the military have been told and trained for over the past 250 years is being turned on its head by Trump and Hegseth.
The military is a hierarchical organization where careers hinge on evaluation reports and command climate. Religious messaging from a superior is not casual speech. It carries weight. It carries pressure. Pressure causes mistakes. In the military, mistakes cost lives.
The follies and collapses of past great militaries can often be traced to the kind of environment Trump and Hegseth appear to be creating in our armed forces: political expediency over proven strategy and planning, political loyalty over expertise and experience. American lives must never be put at risk unless it is absolutely necessary — and never in service of something as dangerous and subjective as the supposed “will of God.”
Trending Stories
BTS Release Comeback Live Trailer: ‘Seven Together, We Can Do Anything'
Harry Styles Is Up for Anything on 'Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally.'
Ann and Nancy Wilson Recall Heart's 1970s Implosion: ‘Emotional Toll Just Kind of Ate Us'
Young Conservatives Are, Once Again, Being Racist in the Group Chat
If the military ever becomes identified with one sect, one creed, or one apocalyptic vision, it will fracture from within and isolate itself from the nation it serves. We are strongest when we remain neutral in faith and firm in law. The uniform represents one sacred commitment: to defend the Constitution. Not a prophecy. Not a political movement. The Constitution.
That line must never be blurred.
We want to hear it. Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Rolling Stone is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Rolling Stone, LLC. All rights reserved.
By Greg Evans
NY & Broadway Editor
Daryl Hannah, in a scathing New York Times guest essay published today, excoriates Ryan Murphy‘s highly-rated FX limited series Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette, in particular her depiction as the villainous “adversary” to the titled romance. And a coke-snorting, heirloom-desecrating, funeral-crashing adversary at that.
Hannah, who dated Kennedy off and on for five years in the early 1990s, reportedly to the considerable consternation of Kennedy's mother Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, writes that the “Daryl Hannah” character in the series, played by Dree Hemingway, is designed to be an “adversary” that threatens the romantic narrative between the two title characters.
Calling Love Story a “tragedy-exploiting television series,” Hannah writes that the “choice to portray [Hannah] as irritating, self-absorbed, whiny and inappropriate was no accident.”
Watch on Deadline
“Storytelling requires tension,” the Splash star writes. “It often requires an obstacle. But a real, living person is not a narrative device. There is also a gendered dimension to this thinking. Popular culture has long elevated certain women by portraying others as rivals, obstacles or villains. Isn't it textbook misogyny to tear down one woman in order to build up another?”
Hannah says that in the weeks since the series began airing, she has received “many hostile and even threatening messages from viewers who seem to believe the portrayal is factual.”
“When entertainment borrows a real person's name,” she continues, “it can permanently impact her reputation.”
The Steel Magnolias actor points to certain Love Story plotlines that are particularly egregious.
“The character ‘Daryl Hannah' portrayed in the series is not even a remotely accurate representation of my life, my conduct or my relationship with John,” she says. “The actions and behaviors attributed to me are untrue. I have never used cocaine in my life or hosted cocaine-fueled parties. I have never pressured anyone into marriage. I have never desecrated any family heirloom or intruded upon anyone's private memorial. I have never planted any story in the press. I never compared Jacqueline Onassis' death to a dog's. It's appalling to me that I even have to defend myself against a television show. These are not creative embellishments of personality. They are assertions about conduct — and they are false.”
In the series, the Hannah character invites some druggy friends over to the heirloom-filled Tribeca loft she shares with Kennedy, and later shows up uninvited to Kennedy Onassis' memorial service.
“I know that as an actress I will be in the public eye,” Hannah writes. “I've endured a number of outrageous lies, crappy stories and unflattering characterizations before. I chose not to battle them but to focus on my work and respect my loved ones by keeping my private life private. But my silence should not be mistaken for agreement with lies. Apparently, my discretion makes me a target.”
She continues, “The Kennedy family is also notoriously private, and I have always honored their right to privacy. Know that most (if not all) of those claiming to have any intimate knowledge of our personal lives are self-serving sensationalists trading in gossip, innuendo and speculation.
“Many people,” she continues, “believe what they see on TV and do not distinguish between dramatization and documented fact — and the impact is not abstract. In a digital era, entertainment often becomes collective memory. Real names are not fictional tools. They belong to real lives.”
Earlier this week, Love Story: John F. Kennedy Jr. & Carolyn Bessette became FX's most-watched limited series ever on streaming, raking in more than 25M hours viewed across the first five episodes on Disney+ and Hulu, according to the network. The series premiered on February 12, and is created by Connor Hines and executive produced by Murphy, Nina Jacobson, Brad Simpson, Connor Hines, Eric Kovtun, Nissa Diederich, Scott Robertson, Monica Levinson, Kim Rosenstock, D.V. DeVincentis and Tanase Popa. Max Winkler executive produced and directed the pilot episode. It is produced by 20th Television.
The series stars Paul Anthony Kelly as JFK Jr. and Sarah Pidgeon as Carolyn Bessette. Naomi Watts plays Jackie Kennedy and Alessandro Nivola as Calvin Klein.
Get our Breaking News Alerts and Keep your inbox happy.
Comments On Deadline Hollywood are monitored. So don't go off topic, don't impersonate anyone, and don't get your facts wrong.
Comment
Name
Email
Website
Δ
Someone should make one of these about Ryan Murphy's life. She how he responds when the shoe is on the other foot.
My, that's quite the bevy of executive producers.
She has a very legitimate gripe here. Murphy's stuff has gone into a cesspool, it used to be funny and entertaining but not for the past few years.
The quality of Murphy's output has nothing to do with Hannah's claims
Darryl, take the Olivia de Havilland route to restoring your name after one of these ‘stories' fictionalised for public entertainment!!!
Signup for Breaking News Alerts & Newsletters
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get our latest storiesin the feed of your favorite networks
We want to hear from you! Send us a tip using our annonymous form.
Sign up for our breaking news alerts
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Deadline is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Deadline Hollywood, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Harry Styles, you have charmed me as of late. Not so much for your music as your…not flamboyance, but exuberance, maybe, or whimsy—qualities in vanishingly short supply with our current crop of male pop stars who don't make backflips a fixture of their live performances. Your goofy grin while doing objectively goofy choreography that lets us in on the joke. Your softcore running photoshoots and accompanying interviews with Haruki Murakami. Your choice to call your fourth album Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally. and have that plausibly seem like how you spend your days and nights.
The album title, which enterprising fans have taken to abbreviating as “Kissco” (KATTDO just doesn't have the same ring to it), also describes the music within. This is not a dance record; it is a pop record inspired by bands Harry Styles likes—the 1975 (“American Girls”), LCD Soundsystem (“Are You Leaving Yet?”), MGMT (“Season 2 Weight Loss”)—who have already done most of the legwork when it comes to blending pop and electronica. However, Styles is working in a tradition: namely, hitting the club to process the fact that you're getting older. Kiss All the Time is well-curated and expensive-sounding, but makes the most of its star when he's totally off his game. Here are five takeaways from the album.
Based on Kiss All the Time's lead single, “Aperture,” it wasn't a stretch to imagine that Styles—or at least his producers, Kid Harpoon and Tyler Johnson—had spent the last few years crate-digging for Joy Orbison and the Orb 12-inches. As it turns out, “Aperture” is an outlier on an album whose nods to the dancefloor never quite tip over into full-on ecstasy. You can still pick up faint traces—the lonely house piano that echoes through “American Girls,” the vocoded chorus on “Ready, Steady, Go!”—throughout the first half of the tracklist, but once “The Waiting Game” dips into full-on adult contemporary, even those start to fade. That may be for the best, considering “Dance No More,” Styles' stab at retro Kool & the Gang-style funk, is the most punishingly caucasian thing I've heard all year. I guess winning Album of the Year over Renaissance wasn't enough for him—he had to go and try to do it himself.
One Direction was a masterclass in branding. At the peak of the Directioner fandom, each member was identifiable by just a couple of adjectives: Harry was “hot and dangerous,” Zayn was “quiet and mysterious,” Niall was “cute and Irish.” Styles' current persona is harder to pin down, landing somewhere between free love cult leader (there's a gospel choir credited on no less than five Kiss All the Time tracks) and a life coach. What are ostensibly come-ons—“It finally appears it's only love,” “You just need a little love,” “You've got to sit yourself down sometimes,”—come off more like sermons or self-help mantras. Over the course of his solo career, Styles has grown into a Liberace-esque figure, minus the feathers and (most of the) rhinestones: a kind voice and a sly smile beamed through the speaker. He's the bad boy who'll never break your heart.
Styles' birthday only falls two years before the commonly accepted Millennial-Gen Z cutoff, but what Kiss All the Time most reminds me of is my favorite episode of the FX dramedy You're the Worst, about a young married couple who worry they've aged out of being cool. I can't tell whether Styles turned 30 and started taking acid or turned 30 and stopped taking acid. Either way, James Murphy makes for a natural choice of patron saint. “Are You Listening Yet?” is homage-verging-on-parody of Murphy's nervy sprechstimme bangers: “God knows your life is on the brink and your therapist's well-fed/The fix of all fixes, unintimate sex.” Styles has entered the “All My Friends” stage of his life, which you can tell because he keeps singing about what all his friends are doing without him, whether that's getting married or going out dancing.
Not long after he was cast in her film Don't Worry Darling, Styles started dating Olivia Wilde in very public, very messy fashion, culminating in “Spit-Gate” at the 2022 Venice Film Festival. Several songs on Harry's House were ostensibly about Wilde, but didn't address the contentious circumstances around their relationship the way Styles does here. “Holdin' the weight of the American children whose hearts you break,” he sings on the acoustic ballad “Paint By Numbers,” alluding to Wilde's kids with her ex-fiancé Jason Sudeikis. “Was it a tragedy when you told her ‘I'm not even thirty-three'?” It's particularly refreshing to hear Styles, who likes to hide behind a paisley-printed rock star pastiche, take a page out of his most famous ex's book and lean into the mess of his own life. I also believe he is the exact kind of person to own several adult coloring books.
“You touched me goodnight/Butterflied both our bellies/You and me are skipping sleep with dirty feet” (“Ready, Steady, Go!”)
“You like the way she talks, but never what she says/You've had your tummy tickled, are you listening yet?” (“Are You Listening Yet?”
“If we stay the course we could get it right/But I'm not devoid of an appetite” (“Coming Up Roses”)
“It's just me on my knees/Squeaky clean fantasy” (“Pop”)
“You gonna get/your feet wet/Respect, respect your mother” (“Dance No More”)
“You've been a baby sleeping upon a candy bar/Till your eyes open on the changing summer light” (“Carla's Song”)
© 2026 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. Pitchfork may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our Affiliate Partnerships with retailers. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast. Ad Choices
CN Entertainment
Daryl Hannah has no love for “Love Story.”
The actress wrote a scathing essay for the New York Times published Friday slamming the Ryan Murphy-produced show, which highlights Hannah's romance with John F. Kennedy Jr. before he fell in love with Carolyn Bessette.
Dree Hemingway plays Hannah in the series.
Advertisement
“I have long believed that engaging with distortion often amplifies it,” the 65-year-old actress wrote at the beginning of her essay.
Advertisement
“But a recent tragedy-exploiting television series about John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette features a character using my name and presents her as me,” Hannah continued. “The choice to portray her as irritating, self-absorbed, whiny and inappropriate was no accident.”
Hannah insisted the series — which stars Paul Anthony Kelly as Kennedy Jr. and Sarah Pidgeon as Bessette — isn't “a remotely accurate representation of my life, my conduct or my relationship with John.”
Advertisement
“The actions and behaviors attributed to me are untrue,” she added, accusing the show of “textbook misogyny” by framing her as a “rival” to Kennedy Jr. and Bessette's relationship.
Hannah then called out specific moments in the show that she insists are inaccurate.
“I have never used cocaine in my life or hosted cocaine-fueled parties,” she wrote. “I have never pressured anyone into marriage. I have never desecrated any family heirloom or intruded upon anyone's private memorial. I have never planted any story in the press. I never compared Jacqueline Onassis' death to a dog's.”
She also said “it's appalling” that she has to “defend” herself against a TV show, reiterating that the “embellishments” of her personality in the program are “false.”
Advertisement
Later in the essay, Hannah claimed that since the show premiered on February 12, she's “received many hostile and even threatening messages from viewers who seem to believe the portrayal is factual.”
“My silence should not be mistaken for agreement with lies,” she continued, after explaining that she usually keeps quiet about her public perception. “Apparently, my discretion makes me a target.”
The “Splash” star also noted that the Kennedys are “notoriously private” and she's “always honored their right to privacy,” unlike the makers of “Love Story.”
“Know that most (if not all) of those claiming to have any intimate knowledge of our personal lives are self-serving sensationalists trading in gossip, innuendo and speculation,” she wrote.
Advertisement
Hannah and Kennedy Jr. had an on-again off-again relationship from 1988 to 1994.
Their romance came to an end after the death of Kennedy Jr.'s mother, Jackie Onassis, in 1994, and the death of Hannah's dog.
Kennedy Jr. was walking the dog in Central Park when it got loose and was hit by a car.
According to the book “JFK Jr.: An Intimate Oral Biography,” Kennedy Jr. was “deeply resentful” that Hannah made him come to her dog's funeral in Los Angeles while his mom was dying of cancer in New York.
Advertisement
After their breakup, Kennedy Jr. began dating Bessette, who he married in 1996. They both died in a 1999 plane crash alongside her sister, Lauren Bessette.
Advertisement
Hannah, meanwhile, has been married to rocker Neil Young since 2018.
“Love Story” airs weekly on Thursdays (9 p.m.) on FX and Fridays on Hulu.
With so much good music being released all the time, it can be hard to determine what to listen to first. Every week, Pitchfork offers a run-down of significant new releases available on streaming services. This week's batch includes new albums from Harry Styles, Johnny Blue Skies, Bonnie “Prince” Billy, Slayr, and more. Subscribe to Pitchfork's New Music Friday newsletter to get our recommendations in your inbox every week. (All releases featured here are independently selected by our editors. When you buy something through our affiliate links, however, Pitchfork earns an affiliate commission.)
Bid adieu to Harry's House, and say hello to Harry's very classy club-slash-listening-room-slash-meditation-center. Led by the LCD Soundsystem and Coldplay-inflected “Aperture,” the British star's first album in four years Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally. trades out the honeyed stylings of his prior record for refined slivers of dance pop, funk, and post-punk. (Don't worry, he finds time for a couple ballads too, namely “Paint by Numbers” and the string-laden “Coming Up Roses”). It was executive produced by Kid Harpoon, and has credits from a bevy of artists including Wolf Alice's Ellie Rowsell, the Smile's Tom Skinner, and a full gospel choir.
Listen on Apple MusicListen on SpotifyListen on TidalListen on Amazon MusicBuy at Rough Trade
War Child has rallied a characteristically impressive lineup for the latest instalment in its generation-spanning Help compilation series. Recorded at Abbey Road and led by the first Arctic Monkeys single since 2022, Help(2) features new music from Big Thief, Cameron Winter, Olivia Rodrigo (covering none other than the Magnetic Fields), King Krule, Fontaines D.C., Bat for Lashes, Pulp, Wet Leg, Depeche Mode, and Black Country, New Road, as well as a bunch of unlikely collaborations: Arooj Aftab and Beck; Damon Albarn, Grian Chatten, and Kae Tempest; Anna Calvi, Dove Ellis, and Nilüfer Yanya; and many more. It is, in short, one of the most star-studded compilations since the charity's last one.
Listen on Apple MusicListen on SpotifyListen on TidalListen on Amazon MusicListen/Buy at BandcampBuy at Rough Trade
Sturgill Simpson got his new name, Johnny Blue Skies, from hanging out in bars. “When I started performing and getting my confidence at open mics and stuff, he'd come to this other bar and see me because it was his night off,” he said in a GQ interview. “He started every time I'd walk into his bar, he'd say, ‘Johnny Blue Skies.' So I just started using it.” Mutiny After Midnight also sounds like it was born in a bar, one in which whiskey is overflowing in every years-worn glass, collars are loose, and someone's in the corner shit-faced, ranting about the government. The album threads disco stabs through country rock and political lyrics, a soundtrack for the best party at the end of the world.
Listen on YouTube
We Are Together Again, Will Oldham's third Bonnie “Prince” Billy album in as many years, resists a hostile world by finding joy in a community of friends and like-minded makers. “The human times have come and gone,” he sings on the pastoral “Life Is Scary Horses.” “We must accept our rule is done, though love is sown and will live on.” Swells of sighing, orchestral-folk warmth fill the album, with a few thorns of melodic dissent to play off Oldham's bottomlessly reassuring tenor. In press materials, he says the album follows a simple ethos: “We start small, continue small, like oak tree seeds or the sperm-and-egg concoctions mixologized by the parents of movers-and-shakers since the dawn of time. Plant these songs into your soul's brain, into your existence's heart and the trees will grow and fruit and flourish and nourish.”
Listen on Apple MusicListen on SpotifyListen on TidalListen on Amazon MusicListen/Buy at BandcampBuy at Rough Trade
Arima Ederra's Rush to Nowhere is the follow-up to her 2022 debut, An Orange Colored Day. The Los Angeles-based singer-songwriter continues that earlier record's soulful meditations, cycling through psychedelic funk à la Tame Impala, hazy guitar pop, and R&B with the larger-than-life orchestral swells of Childish Gambino's later work. Ederra's gauzy vocals are transfixing, flitting from grief to hope. Whatever life swings at her, this is an artist that knows how to find the softness in it all.
Listen on Apple MusicListen on SpotifyListen on TidalListen on Amazon Music
Anyone skeptical of deluxe albums would be unwise to let their opinion slip in the presence of Slayr. The 18-year-old Philadelphia rapper wrote a defiant, all-caps retort to those naysayers on X this week, promising a whole new mixtape as a follow-up to Half Blood, their mixtape from November. The result is Bloodluxe, 10 songs of trap, rage, and digicore. Plus, Lucy Bedroque hops on a track.
Listen on Apple MusicListen on SpotifyListen on TidalListen on Amazon Music
In 2024, the British jazz musician Shabaka put down his beloved saxophone and challenged himself to play the shakuhachi, a Japanese end-blown bamboo flute. That practice prompted his first flute-forward album, 2024's Perceive Its Beauty, Acknowledge Its Grace. Two years later, he returns to the saxophone and the flute on Of the Earth. He brings his expansive jazz to life with colorful percussion and electronic production, often switching gears to feathery ambient, dancehall, and blunted hip-hop. There's another surprise. Were you stunned when the rapper Andre 3000 dropped a Carlos Niño-inspired flute album in 2023? Well, you might be interested in a role reversal: Shabaka taking a stab at rapping.
Listen on Apple MusicListen on SpotifyListen on TidalListen on Amazon MusicListen/Buy at BandcampBuy at Rough Trade
In composing Iowa, Ohyung went to the land of cornfields so endless they become brushstrokes of green and yellow from a moving vehicle, where hog farms are more prevalent than opportunity. The Bushwick-based composer spent their time in the Midwestern state throwing raves and making music with local producers, one of whom, the late Chris Wiersema, she dedicates this album to. While the synths glisten like porcelain shards, there is a violence to the music that sounds meteorological. Quiet thunder murmurs through songs like “Nevada”; haunting chorals suggest inevitable decay. It's the high drama of an outsider peering into a new world.
Listen on Apple MusicListen on SpotifyListen on TidalListen on Amazon MusicListen/Buy at Bandcamp
© 2026 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. Pitchfork may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our Affiliate Partnerships with retailers. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast. Ad Choices
CN Entertainment
Britney Spears' friend and former assistant, Sean Phillip, revealed details about their text exchange following the singer's DUI arrest.
“All I texted her was, ‘Are you OK?' and she said, ‘I'm OK,'” Phillip shared on Friday's episode of “Good Morning Britain.”
“And I said, ‘Do you mind if I speak about this?' And she said, ‘Go ahead,” he continued. “And that's that.”
Advertisement
Phillip noted that while he feels “anxiety” doing interviews about the 44-year-old pop star, he wants “the world to know” that Spears is “such a great person.”
Advertisement
“And we all make mistakes,” he added.
Spears' pal also revealed that the pair speak “almost every other day.”
“I love her. She's such a strong person,” he told the UK morning show hosts. “And so, just as everyone else was surprised with this instance happening, I was as well. But it's not her character. She's just a lovely, lovely, lovely person.”
Advertisement
Phillip further explained that since he's known Spears “for almost 24 years,” he's determined to “protect her no matter what cause she's not a harmful person.”
“It makes me feel bad when she has to endure public mistakes,” he also said.
Later in the interview, the hosts asked Phillip about Spears' manager, Cade Hudson, saying in a statement that the DUI incident will lead to “overdue change” in Spears's life.
Advertisement
“The change I would like to see is [for her to] get out of Los Angeles,” Phillip said. “But I've been talking to her weekly, daily, and she is the same Britney I knew from 2003.”
He continued, “There's no disassociation that I have with her character or personality. But you have to think about these things … who else is she associating with and so on.”
Spears was arrested for driving under the influence by the California Highway Patrol in Ventura County, Calif., at around 9:28 p.m. local time Wednesday.
911 dispatch audio exclusively obtained by Page Six captured an officer describing Spears's Black MMW sedan convertible swerving “in and out of lanes” and “speeding.”
The “Toxic” singer, who was believed to be under the influence of a cocktail of drugs and alcohol during her arrest, underwent a series of field sobriety tests before she was booked into the Ventura County Main Jail. She was released three hours later.
Advertisement
She was reportedly taken to a hospital after her arrest for her blood to be drawn so officials could determine her blood alcohol content.
Page Six learned that Spears was “crying and very tearful” while being booked for her DUI arrest.
“She was incredibly emotional,” a source exclusively told us. “It's been a very hard couple of months.”
Advertisement
Advertisement
Hudson addressed Spears's arrest in a statement to Page Six Thursday, calling the incident “completely inexcusable.”
“Britney is going to take the right steps and comply with the law and hopefully this can be the first step in long overdue change that needs to occur in Britney's life,” her manager said.
“Hopefully, she can get the help and support she needs during this difficult time,” he added.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Two decades on, the #MeToo movement is still fresh fodder for cultural fare, even if its founding principles have fully fallen by the wayside. One of the latest small-screen treatments of cancel culture comes from Julia May Jonas, a playwright and theater professor who tapped into audiences' desire for a more pulpy take on #MeToo's fallout with her hit 2022 debut novel, “Vladimir.”
After landing an offer from Netflix, Jonas dove headfirst into adapting her erotic novel, narrated by a fifty-something English lit professor who becomes obsessed with her strapping junior colleague amid a scandal involving her husband and a number of former students. Despite a lack of experience in the TV world, Jonas also signed on to executive produce and show-run the eight-episode series, produced by Sharon Horgan's Merman and star Rachel Weisz. And as a result, the show — accompanied by some quite instructive poster art — stays true to the book's lusty approach to ethically ambiguous relationships in academia.
Related Stories The Stars of ‘Deli Boys' Explain the Different Types of Excitement They Felt Before Filming Seasons 1 and 2 ‘Vladimir' Review: Rachel Weisz's Vexing Netflix Series Aims for ‘Fleabag' and Falls Wildly Short
When asked about whether, with a few years' distance from her novel, she considered changing elements of her story or modifying its tone, Jonas made it clear that her interest has always been in making art, not championing a particular cause.
Popular on IndieWire
“Sexual dynamics and power dynamics that occupy gray spaces are going to be perennial in terms of our reckoning with [them],” Jonas told IndieWire of her interest in portraying a post-#MeToo-era scandal in higher education — a topic recently tackled by Luca Guadagnino, to very different results, in “After the Hunt.”
“I just don't think, I guess, either the series or the book is a form of advocacy, because I just don't think art is very effective at that. I'm more interested in a character reacting to that in a very specific way inside of individual circumstances and looking at her moral choices,” she said, explaining that she's more keen to ask questions about people's behavior than she is to offer up a criticism — or presumably a defense — of #MeToo.
So if it's not an ambiguously toned drama obsessed with accountability, like Guadagnino's latest — or a skewering weaponization of the movement, like Todd Field's “Tár” — what can audiences expect from the new Netflix adaptation of “Vladimir,” which premieres March 5? Unrolling in eight, bite-sized episodes, Jonas' first foray into show-running, put simply, is the TV equivalent of a page-turner, complete with an alluring cast who knows how to hold an audience's interest.
Even more so than the novel, which was written during a friendlier era for higher education, the mostly lighthearted limited series is largely uninterested in the failings of academia and the ethics of student-teacher relationships, and instead focuses intently on the fantasies of its unnamed female protagonist (Weisz). In the background, the looming threat of her husband and former department chair, John (“Mad Men” cad John Slattery), being formally disgraced for his dalliances with students provides a steady source of conflict. (The public aspect, not the affairs themselves, is the source of contention there per the terms of their open marriage.)
But the pulse driving the 30-minute episodes forward is the protagonist's constant ruminations on her younger self and on Vlad (“The White Lotus” breakout Leo Woodall), a fitness-conscious fiction writer of Russian descent who has just joined the department — partially thanks to the unhappy story of his attractive memoirist wife (Jessica Henwick).
Sacrificing the fourth wall in hopes of getting an imagined audience on her side, Weisz's protagonist — who is fun to watch despite the star being questionably suited to a self-conscious academic who's rekindling her sex drive – spends a fair amount of the series delivering these ruminations directly to camera. Like the even-less-reliable, but certainly no-less-impassioned, author of an Elizabethan tragedy, she regularly stops the action to vent about the drudgeries of upholding the image of the dedicated wife or to wax on about the glories of Vlad's physique.
“We thought about it as, instead of a Shakespearean aside — where someone is, like, ‘Actually, this is what's happening' — what if we have someone talking to the camera but she's always kind of spinning it in a way so that you don't really know if that's the truth or if it's not the truth?” Jonas said, explaining that, with the series, she wanted to continue playing with the idea that, as her protagonist increasingly focuses on herself and her desires, she loosens her grip on what's actually happening around her.
“The book and the series are so much, for me, about a very forceful perspective and how when we take on that perspective — which can be amplified by lust or by stress or whatever it may be — we can lose sight of reality, we can lose sight of other people, and we can lose sight of ourselves,” she said.
With not a lot of airtime to transition her protagonist from reasonable to out of touch with reality, Jonas relegated much of her character's contemplative qualities to the asides and exaggerated her more base characteristics by adding in some reckless behavior.
Outside of her unwavering interest in her queer lawyer daughter (Ellen Robertson), who ends up getting roped into the scandal as well, Weisz's character becomes increasingly unreliable as a person and a professional, making uncharacteristic moves like failing to write a recommendation letter and blowing off a former student and flame of John's (Kayli Carter) who has brought a complaint. So that in a total of four hours, we see Weisz go from a put-together career academic who at least seems to have it all to a feral, middle-aged woman making a series of bad decisions — all in the name of tugging at the shirttail of a muscular, if overly assured, younger man.
“The book is structured in a way where there's a lot of action in the beginning, then there's almost like a period of reflection, and then there's a lot of action in the end. There's a lot of elision in the middle section, and I knew that I would need to address that,” Jonas said. “So in terms of, for example, bringing on the character of Lila, who was involved with John… That was kind of the idea of, ‘How do we keep twisting the wheel of pressure against this character in a way that is supporting what is almost a break for her, at the end?'”
But don't think “Vladimir” is just a show about a woman spurred on by scandal and careening into a series of unwise, and even dangerous, decisions until it all finally comes to an end. No, Jonas' protagonist has much more agency (and fun) than that — especially in sexual fantasies about Woodall's character.
Leaning into the page-turning aspects of her story, which definitely got more than a few real-life middle-aged hearts racing when it was released, Jonas sprinkles in a healthy dose of brief but pulse-quickening daydream sequences that feature Weiz pawing at and being pawed at by a rakishly handsome Woodall. The scenes bring to life passages from the novel in which the protagonist pines for her colleague in more explicit terms, while delivering the bodice-ripping romance the show's built-in audience expects.
“In terms of the intimacy, when it comes to the protagonist and Vladimir, it's really quite tame. It's a lot of imagination and a lot of longing and desire,” Jonas said of figuring out the visual language for bringing the book's very female-gaze-focused brand of desire to the screen.
“We kind of found that as we went along in the shooting process,” Jonas said, adding that she “thought a lot about ‘The Age of Innocence' … in terms of the kind of longing” she wanted to portray in the fantasy scenes — which show the characters locked in clandestine embraces, furtively pulling at each other's garments before reality cuts in.
“To me, [it] felt like, ‘What could be better than someone who just wants you so desperately you don't even have to take your clothes off for it…,'” she said, laughing and stopping herself from explaining any further.
“Vladimir” premieres on Netflix March 5.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Ahead of the March 15 telecast, Lynette Howell Taylor and Bill Kramer speak with THR about the show they're hard at work preparing.
By
Scott Feinberg
Executive Editor of Awards
Ahead of the Oscars on March 15, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences' president Lynette Howell Taylor and CEO Bill Kramer spoke exclusively with The Hollywood Reporter about some of what audiences can expect from the 98th edition of Hollywood's biggest night, which will again be hosted by Conan O'Brien and air on ABC.
* * *
Where does the show stand at the moment?
BILL KRAMER I have to say, the show is looking incredible. One of the great benefits of bringing back Conan early, and Raj [Kapoor] and Katy [Mullan, the telecast's producers], is that we have done so much planning for the show. It's in incredible shape. And we're thrilled with the nominations — great, historic nominations. We just jumped off a call with ABC going over the marketing plan, and it has never looked better.
Related Stories
Movies
Oscars: How the Hair and Makeup Team Behind 'Kokuho' Brought Kabuki Theater's 400-Year-Old Aesthetics to Movie Screens
Movies
Actor Awards Analysis: 'Sinners' Makes a Stand, But Will It Carry Over to the Oscars?
LYNETTE HOWELL TAYLOR Our visual approach to the show is going to feel different — a warmer sort of tone. It feels very intimate and inviting this year. We have the greatest design team — our Emmy-winning design team — who every year do something different, and this year is another evolution.
Related Video
Speaking of Conan returning as host, he signed up to do it again very soon after last year's show. Has he talked about trying anything different this time?
HOWELL TAYLOR The greatest thing about Conan is that he is just a well of great ideas, and that's why everybody loves him, and why audiences are excited to see him come back. He comes from a joyful, celebratory place, that's just sort of innately who he is as a human. We've been fortunate to hear the full gamut of his ideas, and there are so many that there's just not enough space to put all of them in the show. This year will feel fresh and new because the movies are different, and he really knows how to play off of that. Also, the structure of the show is a little different this year than it was last year, even just how we open it. It has to do with leaning into the movies of the moment, and he knows how to do that in a really great way.
So many huge people from the world of film passed away in the last year — Diane Keaton, Robert Redford, Catherine O'Hara, Brigitte Bardot, Claudia Cardinale, Rob Reiner, Robert Duvall, and the list goes on. I imagine the In Memoriam structure will have to be a little different, no?
KRAMER We're not going to give too much away, but you're going to see a beautiful, powerful, deep In Memoriam this year that I think will be very touching.
HOWELL TAYLOR We've spent a lot of time really wanting to do justice to that segment in the show.
You guys recently announced a new deal with YouTube to broadcast the Oscars starting in 2029, but until then you're still doing the show with ABC. Is that not like living with somebody that you've broken up with?
HOWELL TAYLOR It's not even a little bit like that. This is a long, deep partnership with ABC. They've been terrific partners. The two organizations have worked so well together, and on a personal level, we've been working with these individuals for years. We're thinking about the future, but we still have three more shows with ABC and they're very much our partners, and we want to make sure that every year for those three years, we're giving film fans and nominees the best experience possible. ABC feels exactly the same.
KRAMER I could not agree more. Dana [Walden] and Craig [Erwich] and Scott and Rob [Mills] and Deb O'Connell — I mean, we are talking to some if not all of them almost on a daily basis right now. They're incredible partners. They want to see us succeed. They're setting us up for success. And they're thrilled with the shows of the last couple of years. They're feeling really good about the Oscars and they continue to be great partners for us.
In recent weeks at the Berlin Film Festival and elsewhere, some members of the film community have been pushed to be more politically outspoken. But I know that there are also many who don't want to hear about politics from film people. So what would you say to an Oscar nominee who asks if they should use some of their acceptance speech to say something political?
HOWELL TAYLOR The Oscars has always been a platform that supports creative expression and independence and the right to free speech of all artists in the global film community. That's really important. That's what we stand for. In addition, we ask that people are respectful and remember that we're here to celebrate and uplift voices in our community.
KRAMER In the art you see so much activism and empathy and storytelling, and we're here to support that and to amplify that and to celebrate that. And artists who have a moment on our stage when they win? As Lynette said, we ask them to be respectful, but it's a moment to talk from the heart and we allow that.
I don't think there's a bigger star than one you honored at the non-televised Governors Awards in November, Tom Cruise. Have you gotten a commitment yet from him or that night's others honorees be part of the actual Oscars?
KRAMER Well, first, let's say that the Governors Awards were spectacular — Tom and Wynn [Thomas] and Debbie [Allen] were great, and Dolly [Parton] wasn't able to make it, but we were so thrilled to honor all four of them. There's always a moment on the Oscars show where we recognize other awards and the things that we do year-round, and we're planning to do that again this year.
This year you're also going to have the first presentation of a casting Oscar. Anything that you can tease about how that's going to handled?
HOWELL TAYLOR There's a lot of anticipation for this. We're so thrilled that we were able to give that community such a deserved award after a long time of that community really working hard to demonstrate why their work should be awarded — I'm so thrilled that our board voted for that. And I think that casting is something that film fans around the world are really curious about.
KRAMER The interest in this award is huge, and the amount of support and excitement around it is far exceeding anything I was anticipating. It's going to be an exciting moment on stage.
Given the huge showing of the non-English language films this year, including the best picture nominations for Norway's Sentimental Value and Brazil's The Secret Agent, is there going to be any sort of simulcast from those places?
KRAMER One of the many things we're excited about is that we have international representation in every category this year — that's huge, and that is us walking the talk when we talk about globalization of the Academy and diversification of the Academy. It's becoming a truly global show. We're in 200 markets this year, so there will be a lot of interest in those markets and a lot of coverage in those markets. How that plays out on stage? We're not willing to give up anything right now. But I will say, and I know you saw this, last year they stopped [Brazilian] Carnival and were projecting the Oscars on buildings! The fandom down there is just incredible.
Some of this year's nominated songwriters are upset that only two of the five nominated songs — “Golden” from KPop Demon Hunters and “I Lied to You” from Sinners — will be performed on the show. Why was that decision made?
KRAMER A couple of things. That category is absolutely still fully on the show — we're committed to that to all 24 categories — and all of the nominees will be represented on the show in a special way. I want to make that extremely clear. The two “moments” we have on the show are about celebrating big global cultural moments in cinema, and yes, two of the original songs are part of those moments, but that does not negate the power of the other nominees and our interest in celebrating those nominees.
You're saying “moments” instead of “performances.” Does that mean that those two performances are part of a larger thing?
HOWELL TAYLOR Yeah, that's exactly what he means. And by the way, there have only been several moments in time where all five nominees have been on the show, for any number of reasons — sometimes there's two songs, three songs, four songs. Very rarely has it been all five. But everybody's used to the traditional way that that's been presented. What we're doing is that the package for the nominated songs is treated in the same way that other packages are treated for all of the categories, so when Bill says we're not doing anything less than, that's what that means. And then in addition to that, there are two moments on the show that are celebrating the cultural phenomena of two specific movies, and music is a part of that.
When you started in the job, Lynette, you thought this was going to be your one and only Oscars as president, because you were going to “term out” and have to step away from the board for at least a year. But the board just approved a rule-change that will enable you to potentially stay on without interruption for up to three more one-year terms. Can you talk about how this change came about?
HOWELL TAYLOR Well, the bylaws already allowed a president to run for up to four terms, and the board basically voted to allow a sitting president to continue to run for those one-year elected terms [rather than terming out]. Part of the reason that came about was when we changed our term limits, it became clear that there'd be a lot more turnover, potentially, for whoever was sitting in the president's seat. I mean, listen, I still have to get voted in every year, it's not a fait accompli that I'll be doing this, but I really love that I have the opportunity to run again. I feel very privileged and very honored to be able to be in this position. But again, I take it very much a year at a time. There's so much to do in any given year, and I don't take anything for granted that I'll still be here next year.
KRAMER Given my background in nonprofit arts management, I'm always thinking about governance and organizational structure. This bylaws change is good governance for us and it allows for continuity of leadership. Lynette's been an amazing president. We were lucky to have Janet [Yang] for three years, and you want that sort of continuity in the president role, so this allows a pathway for that while still honoring the intent. When the bylaws were originally created, they said a president can serve for four consecutive one-year terms, so this allows for that pathway. We were thrilled that the governance committee and the board approved this.
Lynette, you were nominated for A Star Is Born at the Oscars in 2019, produced the Oscars in 2020, got elected to the board that same year, and then served as the chair of the awards committee, which helps to plan the Oscars, in 2023 and 2024. The 2023 and 2024 shows were also the first two held after you became CEO, Bill, followed by last year's. But it was under both of your watch that planning for the Oscars became a year-round thing. Why?
KRAMER When I became CEO, it was something that I spoke about with the board, so it wasn't just my decision. But I look at the show as I would our Museum Gala: you start planning the next Gala the day after the Gala ends, and we need to treat the Oscars the same way. Of course, things shift post-nominations sometimes, but between the last year's show and the nominations for this year's show, there's a lot you can plan out. So if you turn as many variables into constants as you can, that allows you to just focus on the things that you need to focus on post-nominations. And that's been incredibly helpful.
Of the shows that you have each been a part of, what is the moment that you are each proudest of?
KRAMER I'm so proud of all three shows. Our ratings have gone up every year. Jimmy [Kimmel] was amazing to work with, Raj and Katy have been incredible to work with, along with [production designers] Alana [Billingsley] and Misty [Buckley], and Conan was just spectacular last year. But to pick a moment that really stands out? Last year's opener, post-fires—
HOWELL TAYLOR I was going to say the same thing!
KRAMER I mean, that was such a beautiful moment.
HOWELL TAYLOR I think what it speaks to is how we are able to meet moments. I am really proud of the way that we handled that last year.
KRAMER And in a way that spoke a very cinematic language, but also showed a lot of hope, and met the moment in an appropriate way. It allowed everyone to relax into the show and feel like they were in a safe space, a celebratory space, in a space of a lot of beauty. That was a difficult balancing act to pull off.
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
By Jake Kanter
International Investigations Editor
EXCLUSIVE: Amid ongoing reviews into the debacle that led to a racial slur at the BAFTA Film Awards airing on British television, Deadline hears of a difficult meeting between Warner Bros. and the BBC.
Three sources familiar with the encounter said Sinners studio Warner Bros. expressed grave concerns over the BBC broadcasting John Davidson's involuntary N-word interruption when Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo were on stage.
Warner Bros. executives are said to have pressed the BBC for answers about why the racial slur made the final cut, despite the BAFTAs being recorded two hours before broadcasting on television. Questions were also raised about why the incident remained on iPlayer for 15 hours, even though the BBC was aware that the N-word was audible.
Related Stories
News
Is AI The Magic Sauce That Will Unlock Value In Media Mega-Mergers?
News
"YouTube Economics Are Challenging For Broadcasters," BBC Says
Warner Bros demanded to know what steps the BBC will take to prevent a similar incident from happening again. “They were furious,” said one person briefed on the encounter, which took place last week. Warner executives had initially sought a meeting with the BBC on the Monday following the ceremony, but were left frustrated when the gathering did not materialize.
Watch on Deadline
Senior sources at the BBC have acknowledged that the N-word error was avoidable, and the broadcaster has formally apologized in a statement, in which it said the incident was a “serious mistake.” The BBC's Executive Complaints Unit is currently carrying out a “fast-tracked investigation” into what took place.
BAFTA has launched its own review. In addition to the BBC meeting, Warner Bros. has been in regular dialogue with the arts charity, raising serious concerns about its handling of the matter. Studio executives also confronted BAFTA CEO Jane Millichip and chair Sara Putt at the post-show dinner.
Miscommunication Led To Mistake
Deadline has pieced together different accounts, and it appears as though the incident stemmed from miscommunication on the night. The BBC and producer Penny Lane TV did not hear the racial slur from their position in the outside broadcast truck, but later caught and cut a second incident, in which Davidson again said the N-word when Sinners star Wunmi Mosaku collected her Supporting Actress prize.
On a WhatsApp group chat, a BAFTA representative raised the alarm about an N-word being audible, but sources said that this was only after Mosaku had left the stage. The BBC and producer Penny Lane TV received BAFTA's message, but assumed it referred to the Mosaku incident, rather than the slur directed at Jordan and Lindo, meaning they thought the N-word had already been cut.
It was only after the awards were broadcast on BBC One that all parties realized that the Jordan and Lindo incident had been missed. Discussions took place on the night, during which it was raised that the ceremony should be removed from iPlayer. Instead, the show remained on the streaming service until nearly midday on Monday, despite pleading from BAFTA and Warner Bros.
The sluggish response to removing the ceremony from iPlayer will likely fall under the scope of the BBC review. It is not clear when the BBC will publish its findings, but the corporation has a deadline of March 9 to answer questions about the debacle posed by UK Parliament's influential Culture, Media and Sport Committee. An edited version of the BAFTA Film Awards ceremony has still not been reinstated to iPlayer nearly two weeks after the event.
The BBC has also faced criticism from Davidson, with the campaigner telling Variety that it could have done more to stop his involuntary racial slur from airing. Lisa Nandy, the UK culture secretary, has also voiced concern, saying in a statement: “Broadcasting a racial slur is completely unacceptable and harmful. The BBC must ensure that this never happens again.”
Warner Bros. and the BBC declined to comment.
Get our Breaking News Alerts and Keep your inbox happy.
Comments On Deadline Hollywood are monitored. So don't go off topic, don't impersonate anyone, and don't get your facts wrong.
Comment
Name
Email
Website
Δ
Signup for Breaking News Alerts & Newsletters
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get our latest storiesin the feed of your favorite networks
We want to hear from you! Send us a tip using our annonymous form.
Sign up for our breaking news alerts
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Deadline is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Deadline Hollywood, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
By providing your information, you agree to our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.
We use vendors that may also process your information to help provide our services. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA Enterprise and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
By
Emily Zemler
Jimmy Fallon appeared on The Late Show last night, making his debut appearance on the show. The Tonight Show host chatted with Stephen Colbert about their long-time friendship and memories over the years before Fallon performed a musical number in celebration of Colbert.
The serenade paid tribute to Colbert's work on The Late Show, which will come to an end on May 21. The lyrics were sung to the tune of “My Way” and saw Fallon commenting on Donald Trump's involvement in the conclusion of the show.
“And now the end is near,” Fallon crooned as the lights dimmed. “And so you face the final curtain/ But Trump, he made it clear/ He wants you gone/ Of that we're certain/ You've been a gracious host/ We've loved you since the old Report days/ And more/ Much more than this/ You did it your way.”
He continued, “CBS, they said you're through/ And now it's down to just to two Jimmys/ But wait, before you go/ Can I please have one of your Emmys?”
Popular on Rolling Stone
At the end of the song, the duo climbed on Colbert's desk and embraced. “I'll see you in the locker room,” Colbert told Fallon.
Last year, CBS announced that it planned end its late-night talk show, hosted by Colbert for over a decade, amid financial issues at the network.
“We consider Stephen Colbert irreplaceable and will retire The Late Show franchise at that time. We are proud that Stephen called CBS home. He and the broadcast will be remembered in the pantheon of greats that graced late-night television,” CBS wrote in a statement. “This is purely a financial decision against a challenging backdrop in late night. It is not related in any way to the show's performance, content or other matters happening at Paramount.”
Trending Stories
BTS Release Comeback Live Trailer: ‘Seven Together, We Can Do Anything'
Harry Styles Is Up for Anything on 'Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally.'
Ann and Nancy Wilson Recall Heart's 1970s Implosion: ‘Emotional Toll Just Kind of Ate Us'
Young Conservatives Are, Once Again, Being Racist in the Group Chat
Colbert addressed the decision on his show, noting, “I'm not being replaced. This is all just going away. I do want to say that the folks of CBS have been great partners.”
Colbert started hosting The Late Show in 2015, taking the baton from David Letterman after hosting the news satire show The Colbert Report on Comedy Central. The show, which films in the Ed Sullivan Theater in New York City, is currently in its 11th season with Colbert as host.
We want to hear it. Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Rolling Stone is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Rolling Stone, LLC. All rights reserved.
By
Emily Zemler
Yesterday, Donald Trump fired Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem—much to the delight of late-night hosts. Noem's departure had the jokes rolling in, with several hosts proposing possible punishments for Noem, who has faced several weeks of public scrutiny, personal scandal, and bad press.
On The Late Show, Stephen Colbert could not contain his glee. “Let's talk about Kristi Noem getting fired!” he said as he opened his monologue. “It's too soon to know why Kristi Noem is gone,” he noted. “Before we find out any more information about what happened I just want to say with absolute certainty: She is a domestic terrorist who deserves to go to Gitmo.”
He added, “I'm sorry, I'm being told that's not true. But you know what, I acted on the information we had at the time.”
Colbert recounted how Trump announced the news on social media, as usual. “The current Secretary, Kristi Noem, who has served us well, and has had numerous and spectacular results (especially on the Border!), will be moving to be Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas, our new Security Initiative in the Western Hemisphere we are announcing on Saturday in Doral, Florida,” the president wrote.
“Sounds like someone's about to become the new FIFA Secretary of Homeland Security,” Colbert quipped. “Well, at least Noem can fall back on all her other jobs: cowboy, soldier, and village crone who tells you exactly when you'll die.”
Jimmy Kimmel was similarly pleased on Jimmy Kimmel Live. “I think I speak for all of us when I say we wish Kristi luck in her brand new, completely made up job,” Kimmel said.
“Trump was said to be particularly unhappy with Noem's testimony claiming that he signed off on a $220 million ad campaign that featured her in commercials wearing different outfits, rounding up immigrants, and riding a horse,” Kimmel explained. “Trump said he didn't know anything about it even though we all knew everything about it. You know him. He doesn't watch much television.”
Editor's picks
The 250 Greatest Albums of the 21st Century So Far
The 100 Best TV Episodes of All Time
The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time
100 Best Movies of the 21st Century
He added, “You know what the funniest thing would be? The funniest thing would be if they deport her to El Salvador.”
On The Tonight Show, Jimmy Fallon announced the news to huge cheers from the audience. “You never know with Trump, he either thinks she's bad at her job or he wants her to be the new supreme leader of Iran,” Fallon said. “Noem is the first cabinet secretary Trump has fired since returning to office. He was like, ‘Man I forgot how good this feels. Get Kash Patel in here.'”
On The Daily Show, Michael Kosta jokingly exclaimed, “Now that she's gone the Trump administration is going to be great!”
“Don't worry about Kristi,” he said. “She's already got a new job that is every bit as important. Yes, the special envoy for the Shield of the Americas, Western Hemisphere division. You know it's a promotion when the job was just invented six minutes ago using refrigerator magnets.”
Trending Stories
BTS Release Comeback Live Trailer: ‘Seven Together, We Can Do Anything'
Harry Styles Is Up for Anything on 'Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally.'
Ann and Nancy Wilson Recall Heart's 1970s Implosion: ‘Emotional Toll Just Kind of Ate Us'
Young Conservatives Are, Once Again, Being Racist in the Group Chat
Noem's dissmissal comes after she was berated by lawmakers on Capitol Hill over a series of disastrous blunders by her department, including the killings of two American citizens by border patrol agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and apparent attempts by DHS to stifle investigations into the shootings. Noem has also been under fire for extravagant spending at the department, while placing restrictions on FEMA disaster relief funds.
Noem was also grilled by lawmakers about her alleged affair with temporary government employee and former Trump Campaign Manager Corey Lewandowski. In recent weeks, Lewandowski and Noem have been accused of abusing DHS resources and generally creating chaos at the department.
We want to hear it. Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Rolling Stone is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Rolling Stone, LLC. All rights reserved.
It's not hard to imagine that somewhere along the way, someone thought of pitching Netflix's new sci-fi action thriller War Machine as “not your grandma's war movie.” Any film that shifts from an extended army training sequence to an ominous alien asteroid barreling towards Earth certainly seems worthy of the distinction. But the best thing about War Machine is that it kind of is your grandma's war movie. Though writer/director Patrick Hughes starts his story in the modern combat zone of Kandahar, he serves up earnest, sun-dappled Americana that calls to mind not just the Tony Scott films of the 1980s, but the John Ford films of the 1950s. Forget the gritty realism and quippy one-liners that so often define the modern action genre, War Machine is proudly, almost guilelessly old-fashioned.
The opening 30 minutes essentially speedrun the plot of Top Gun only without the shirtless volleyball and drunken karaoke. Reacher star and human boulder Alan Ritchson plays an affable, unnamed soldier yukking it up with his brother (Jai Courtney) as their convoys cross paths under a golden sunrise in the Afghanistan desert. When an attack hits the group, however, Ritchson is left wounded, traumatized, and ready to prove himself by completing an Army Ranger selection course run by Dennis Quaid and Esai Morales in the two days they were on set. (Though the script otherwise doesn't really concern itself with realism, it does somewhat hilariously pause not once but twice to clarify that the 43-year-old Ritchson is just under the age cutoff for such a thing.)
Redubbed “81,” the lumbering cadet is too closed-off to bond with his fellow recruits, who—befitting this kind of movie—get about half a personality trait each. For a while, it seems like War Machine might just be a straight military training drama about a troubled soldier pushing himself to his limits and learning to reconnect with humanity in the process. Then the requisite “last training mission gone wrong” sequence takes a dramatic turn. Instead of a mock battle, 81 and his fellow trainees find themselves facing off against a giant, bipedal, AT-AT-style walking alien weapon that eviscerates anything in its path.
War Machine finds its groove in its second act, as its old-fashioned tone smashes up against a modern level of brutal, bloody R-rated violence. Each battle sequence is filled with squelching impalements and shocking dismemberments. When the hits hit, you feel them. Yet this is also the kind of movie where, once the troops get swept away in some river rapids, the camera immediately pans back to reveal the waterfall they're careening towards. Nothing here is ironic or “elevated” or charged with social commentary. It's a series of classic action tropes delivered with tactility by Hughes, who stages an admirable amount of the action on sets and locations rather than CGI backdrops.
The film strives for a Predator-meets-Terminator-meets-Aliens vibe as the unstoppable alien weapon continues to pick off soldiers through all manner of forest and mountain terrain. Yet what sets War Machine apart from those souped-up '80s classics is the almost WWII-era sincerity behind 81's commitment to getting an injured squad member (Stephan James) back to base. Instead of bonding through standard comedic banter, the two men bond over genuine words of support and encouragement. While War Machine knows it's kind of a ridiculous movie, it's also unembarrassed to wear its heart on its sleeve rather than hiding it behind a winking sense of sarcastic detachment. (A far cry from Hughes' previous directorial work on The Expendables 3 and The Hitman's Bodyguard films.)
It's a shame, then, that the whole thing loses some steam in its final act. The alien death machine attacks shift from unnerving to repetitive as the soldiers fail to make any attempt to figure out how to evade its sensors. And the set pieces get less creative as their reliance on CGI becomes more obvious. Given all the tangibility that came before, the final two disappointing action sequences feel more like a cutscene from a video game. Still, the fact that it's not really trying to be clever on top of it all helps its case. War Machine may not aim all that high, but that only makes it easier to hit its mark.
Director: Patrick Hughes
Writer: Patrick Hughes, James Beaufort
Starring: Alan Ritchson, Dennis Quaid, Stephan James, Jai Courtney, Esai Morales, Blake Richardson, Keiynan Lonsdale, Daniel Webber
Release Date: March 6, 2026 (Netflix)
Recommended for You1Hijack season 2 reaches its dull destination2Eccentric and uneasy, Heel puts a teen through obedience school3Industry's Myha'la and Marisa Abela on their gutting finale conversation4Ted McGinley steals the show in this week's Shrinking5David Zaslav reaps more benefits of Paramount offer by unloading $114 million of WBD stock
© 2026 Paste Media Group. All Rights Reserved
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
A U.S. Army Ranger team does battle with a giant alien robot in a movie co-starring Dennis Quaid, Esai Morales and Jai Courtney.
By
Frank Scheck
Action movies don't get more generic than this second Netflix movie featuring the exact same title as the 2017 Brad Pitt starrer (good luck on your searches). War Machine stars Alan Ritchson of Reacher fame as the leader of a platoon of U.S. Rangers who have the bad luck of encountering a giant killer robot from outer space that seems to be left over from War of the Worlds. The sort of mindless time-killer that will boost your testosterone level while watching it, the film seems perfectly designed for those born too late to have seen the original Predator, or any of its 80s and 90s-era clones, during their theatrical runs.
Related Stories
Movies
'I Can Only Imagine 2' Review: Milo Ventimiglia in a Merciless MercyMe Sequel
Movies
Alan Ritchson Faces Otherworldly Threat in Netflix's 'War Machine' Trailer
Ritchson's character, known only as “81,” is given a cursory backstory in the form of an opening scene — set two years before the main action — depicting a tragic military incident involving his brother (an unfortunately underused Jai Courtney) in Kandahar. Cue the subsequent flashbacks as 81 frequently relives his trauma at inopportune moments.
War Machine
The Bottom Line
Not all it could be.
Release date: Friday, March 6Cast: Alan Ritchson, Blake Richardson, Keiynan Lonsdale, Daniel Webber, Jai Courtney, Esai Morales, Stephan James, Dennis QuaidDirector: Patrick HughesScreenwriters: Patrick Hughes, James Beaufort
Rated R,
1 hour 46 minutes
Undergoing training in Colorado with a new batch of recruits, 81 finds himself recruited by his commanding officers (Dennis Quaid and Esai Morales, competing to see who can be the most gruffly macho) to lead a mission to retrieve a downed pilot in the wilderness. It's there that they encounter the titular alien creation, who looks like a massive Roomba with legs. And the invader is definitely not friendly, throwing off a barrage of killer rays that blast the men to smithereens.
The film's first half largely features montages of the sort of hardcore training exercises — including walking at the bottom of a pool while carrying heavy weights — that Pete Hegseth probably uses to lull himself to sleep. But all the grunting, grimacing and flexing on display is merely a prelude to the main action, in which 81 and his fellow soldiers — who include “109” (Jack Patten), “7” (Stephan James) and “57” (Daniel Webber) — fight for their lives. It's just as well the characters don't have names, since they're largely indistinguishable from each other.
Director Patrick Hughes stages the viscerally forceful action scenes with undeniable skill, having garnered the relevant experience with his previous helming of such films as The Expendables 3 and The Hitman's Bodyguard and its sequel. There are some terrifically staged sequences, including a hair-raising one involving traversing rapids with an overhead rope, for which the stunt performers and Ritchson, who clearly did many of his own stunts, deserved extra pay.
There's also no shortage of pyrotechnics, with the frequent explosions serving as useful reminders to viewers to stop folding their clothes and resume looking at the screen. The film's R rating is well-deserved thanks to the profusion of burnt and dismembered bodies on view in the alien machine's wake.
Unfortunately, the screenplay by Hughes and co-writer James Beaufort leaves much to be desired, with lines like “Help me with 7!” sounding like a student imploring a classmate to give him the answer to a difficult test question. Not to mention this exchange during a particularly tense moment: “Wait, you mean it's from another planet?” one of the soldiers asks. “Well, it sure as shit ain't from this one,” 81 replies. Not even Stallone or Schwarzenegger could sell dialogue like that.
Ritchson, whose massive bulk qualifies as a special effect itself, displays his usual charisma, but the one-note nature of the proceedings doesn't give him the opportunity to do much more than look physically or emotionally anguished. Although he does appear very much at home behind the wheel of a massive excavator with which his character battles the alien machine in the climactic sequence.
The film finishes on the sort of gung-ho patriotic note — complete with soldiers running in slow-motion with their rifles in hand — that could easily wind up in an American military recruitment commercial. They'll probably leave out the fact that the film was shot primarily in Australia.
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
By
Emily Zemler
Jennifer Lopez and David Guetta released a collaborative single, “Save Me Tonight.” Lopez initially teased the anthemic, dance-ready track during World Pride Music Festival last summer, as well as on her Up All Night: Live in 2025 tour.
The song marks Lopez's first new release since the Kiss of the Spider Woman soundtrack dropped last year. The singer will give the track its official global live debut tonight when she kicks off the next phase of her Las Vegas residency at the Colosseum. The performance will be simulcast on her TikTok Live, Instagram Live, and YouTube Live channels.
Lopez initially launched her stint in Vegas in December. The shows featured her performing a variety of her own music, including hits like “Jenny From the Block” and “Let's Get Loud.” On opening night she also welcomed Ja Rule to the stage for two songs, “Ain't It Funny” and “I'm Real.” The new phase of concerts will run through March 28.
The residency shows are the first live concert performances Lopez scheduled since cancelling her This Is Me… Live tour in 2024. “I am completely heartsick and devastated about letting you down,” she said at the time. “Please know that I wouldn't do this if I didn't feel that it was absolutely necessary. I promise I will make it up to you and we will all be together again. I love you all so much. Until next time…”
Trending Stories
BTS Release Comeback Live Trailer: ‘Seven Together, We Can Do Anything'
Harry Styles Is Up for Anything on 'Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally.'
Ann and Nancy Wilson Recall Heart's 1970s Implosion: ‘Emotional Toll Just Kind of Ate Us'
Young Conservatives Are, Once Again, Being Racist in the Group Chat
Guetta has recently collaborated with artists like Sia and Teddy Swims. The DJ spoke to Rolling Stone about his success in January, saying he has a “pure love for what I do.”
“I crave challenges, stepping out of my comfort zone, taking risks, questioning myself,” Guetta said. “Being on stage is a drug. In Ibiza, I'll work on music in the morning, then test a track that same night in front of thousands. Nothing beats watching a crowd lose it to an idea born just hours earlier.”
We want to hear it. Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Rolling Stone is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Rolling Stone, LLC. All rights reserved.
Happy hunting!
By
Hannah Dailey
Start your engines, ARMY — your search engines, that is. BTS is teaming up with Google ahead of new album ARIRANG, sending fans on a wild scavenger hunt leading up to the project's release.
Launched Thursday (March 5) and available only on mobile, the game begins by typing “BTS” in the Google search bar, at which point a small message in a bottle graphic appears at the bottom of the screen. Once clicked, it directs players through a series of increasingly difficult trivia questions and challenges themed around the Bangtan Boys, with digital souvenirs available to earn along the way.
Each week leading up to the release of ARIRANG on March 20, a new set of clues will drop.
Beyond the fast-approaching release of the group's first full-length in six years, the game celebrates the fact that BTS is Google's most-searched boy band of all time, dating back to 2004. It's one of many ways the septet comprised of RM, Jin, Suga, j-hope, Jimin, V and Jung Kook has kept fans engaged leading up to the release of ARIRANG, having also recently appeared on the cover of GQ to talk about about BTS' evolution and releasing the official tracklist and producer credits. As the latter revealed on Tuesday (March 3), Diplo, Kevin Parker of Tame Impala, Mike WiLL Made-It and Ryan Tedder all helped produce the project, while members of the band assisted in cowriting every single one of the 14 tracks.
Plus, BTS will play a comeback concert that will be live-streamed concurrently on Netflix the day after ARIRANG drops, the trailer for which premiered Wednesday.
Get weekly rundowns straight to your inbox
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *
Post Comment
A daily briefing on what matters in the music industry
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
A daily briefing on what matters in the music industry
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Billboard is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Billboard Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally., the grammatically cumbersome new album from Harry Styles, is out now. Below, listen to the pop superstar's follow-up to Harry's House, and check out the full credits to see the myriad artists—including Wolf Alice's Ellie Rowsell and the Smile's Tom Skinner—who helped bring it to fruition.
Kiss All the Time. Disco, Occasionally. was executive produced by Kid Harpoon, with mixing by Mark “Spike” Stent and his assistant Kieran Beardmore. Emily Lazar mastered the record, assisted by Bob DeMaa. In tandem with the release, Styles has also detailed plans for a concert film, One Night In Manchester.
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles and Kid HarpoonProduced by: Kid HarpoonPiano: YaffraBackground vocals: Ellie RowsellChoir: House Gospel Choir — ZaZa Wright, Dean Patron, Monique Meade, Shayanne Campbell, Vania Lima, Gemma Knight Jones, Monday Osarobo, CJ Idos, Cartell Green Brown, Aleysha Eve, Laura Leon, Natalie Maddix, Daniel Thomas, and Harrison AtleeEngineering: Brian RajaratnamAdditional engineering: Liam HebbAssistant engineering: Kian Moghaddamzadeh, Tommy Bosustow, Gili Portal, Alfie Scott, and Isaac AllenRecorded at: Hansa Studios, RAK Studios, Ridgemont Studio
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles, Kid Harpoon, and Tyler JohnsonProduced by: Kid Harpoon and Tyler JohnsonDrums: Tom SkinnerEngineering: Brian RajaratnamAdditional engineering: Liam HebbAssistant engineering: Kian Moghaddamzadeh, Francesca Edwards, Tommy Bosustow, Seth Taylor, Gili Portal, and Alfie ScottRecorded at: Abbey Road Studios, Hansa Studios, RAK Studios, Ridgemont Studio
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles, Kid Harpoon, and Tyler JohnsonProduced by: Kid HarpoonAdditional production: Tyler JohnsonDrums: Tom SkinnerEngineering: Brian RajaratnamAdditional engineering: Liam HebbAssistant engineering: Kian Moghaddamzadeh, Freddie Light, Gili Portal, and Alfie ScottRecorded at: Abbey Road Studios, RAK Studios, Ridgemont Studio, Traquillo StudiosMixed at: SLS Studios
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles, Kid Harpoon, and Tyler JohnsonProduced by: Kid Harpoon and Tyler JohnsonChoir: House Gospel Choir — ZaZa Wright, Dean Patron, Monique Meade, Shayanne Campbell, Vania Lima, Gemma Knight Jones, Monday Osarobo, CJ Idos, Cartell Green Brown, Aleysha Eve, Laura Leon, Natalie Maddix, Daniel Thomas, and Harrison AtleeEngineering: Nick Lobel, Brian RajaratnamAdditional engineering: Liam Hebb, Owen Stoutt, and Emi TrevenaAssistant engineering: Joe Kress, Freddie Light, Tommy Bosustow, Gili Portal, and Alfie ScottRecorded at: Abbey Road Studios, Clubhouse, RAK Studios
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles, Kid Harpoon, and Tyler JohnsonProduced by: Kid HarpoonAdditional production: Tyler JohnsonBackground vocals: Ellie RowsellEngineering: Owen Stoutt, Brian RajaratnamAdditional engineering: Emi Trevena, Liam HebbAssistant engineering: Freddie Light, and Isaac AllenRecorded at: Abbey Road Studios, Green Oak Studio, RAK Studios, Ridgemont Studio
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles, Kid Harpoon, and Tyler JohnsonProduced by: Kid Harpoon and Tyler JohnsonEngineering: Brian RajaratnamRecorded at: Traquillo Studios
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles, Kid Harpoon, and Tyler JohnsonProduced by: Kid HarpoonDrums: Tom SkinnerBackground vocals: Ellie RowsellChoir: House Gospel Choir — ZaZa Wright, Dean Patron, Monique Meade, Shayanne Campbell, Vania Lima, Gemma Knight Jones, Monday Osarobo, CJ Idos, Cartell Green Brown, Aleysha Eve, Laura Leon, Natalie Maddix, Daniel Thomas, and Harrison AtleeEngineering: Brian RajaratnamAdditional engineering: Liam HebbAssistant engineering: Kian Moghaddamzadeh, Tommy Bosustow, Isaac Allen, Alfie Scott, and Gili PortalRecorded at: Hansa Studios, RAK Studios, Traquillo Studios
Music and lyrics: Harry StylesProduced by: Kid HarpoonArranged by: Jules Buckley, Kid Harpoon, and Harry StylesPiano: YaffraEngineering: Brian Rajaratnam, Liam HebbOrchestral engineering: James “Jez” MurphyAssistant engineering: Tommy Bosustow, Tom Ashpitel, Major Quintero, Gili Portal, and Alfie ScottOrchestra: Jules Buckley (Celeste), Chris Hill (Upright bass), Sam Wilson (Vibraphone, marimba), Owen Slade (Tuba), Marianne Haynes (Violin leader), Richard George, Jackie Shave, Debbie Widdup, Alessandro Ruisi, Ian Humphries, John Mills, Nicky Sweeney, Braimah Kanneh-Mason, Martyn Jackson, Eloisa-Fleur Thom, Natalia Bonner, Louisa Fuller, Thomas Gould, Charlie Brown, Jenny Sacha, Sarah Daramy-Williams, Jeremy Isaac (Violin), John Metcalfe, Triona Milne, Bruce White, Nicholas Bootiman, Kate Musker, Emma Owens (Viola), Ian Burdge, Chris Worsey, Katherine Jenkinson, Jonny Byers (Cello), Laurence Ungless, Roger Linley, Toby Hughes (Double bass), Eliza Marshall (Flute), Ruth Contractor (Cor anglais), Barnaby Robson (Clarinet), Jenny Goshawk (Fixer), Dave Foster (Librarian)Recorded at: Abbey Road Studios, Angel Studios, RAK Studios
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles, Kid Harpoon, and Tyler JohnsonProduced by: Kid Harpoon and Tyler JohnsonDrums: Tom SkinnerChoir: House Gospel Choir — ZaZa Wright, Dean Patron, Monique Meade, Shayanne Campbell, Vania Lima, Gemma Knight Jones, Monday Osarobo, CJ Idos, Cartell Green Brown, Aleysha Eve, Laura Leon, Natalie Maddix, Daniel Thomas, and Harrison AtleeEngineering: Brian Rajaratnam, Owen StouttAdditional engineering: Liam Hebb, Emi TrevenaAssistant engineering: Kian Moghaddamzadeh, Tommy Bosustow, and Alfie ScottRecorded at: Hansa Studios, RAK Studios
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles and Kid HarpoonProduced by: Kid HarpoonDrums: Tom SkinnerSynths: YaffraChoir: House Gospel Choir — ZaZa Wright, Dean Patron, Monique Meade, Shayanne Campbell, Vania Lima, Gemma Knight Jones, Monday Osarobo, CJ Idos, Cartell Green Brown, Aleysha Eve, Laura Leon, Natalie Maddix, Daniel Thomas, and Harrison AtleeBackground vocals: Kid Harpoon, Stella Blackmon, Liam Hebb, Luis Viner, Tom Skinner, and YaffraEngineering: Brian RajaratnamAdditional engineering: Liam HebbAssistant engineering: Kian Moghaddamzadeh, Tommy Bosustow, and Alfie ScottRecorded at: Hansa Studios, RAK Studios
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles, Kid Harpoon, and Tyler JohnsonProduced by: Kid Harpoon and Tyler JohnsonDrums: Tom SkinnerTrumpet: Mark CrownB3: YaffraEngineering: Brian RajaratnamVocal engineering: Liam HebbAssistant engineering: Kian Moghaddamzadeh, Francesca Edwards, Gili Portal, and Alfie ScottRecorded at: Hansa Studios, RAK Studios
Music and lyrics: Harry Styles and Kid HarpoonProduced by: Kid HarpoonPiano: YaffraEngineering: Brian RajaratnamAdditional engineering: Liam HebbAssistant engineering: Kian MoghaddamzadehRecorded at: Hansa Studios
© 2026 Condé Nast. All rights reserved. Pitchfork may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as part of our Affiliate Partnerships with retailers. The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast. Ad Choices
CN Entertainment
The track is finally out officially after the singer performed it numerous times on stage.
By
Hannah Dailey
Jennifer Lopez and David Guetta have finally released their “Save Me Tonight” collaboration, a song the pop star has played before on stage but hasn't officially dropped until now.
Hitting streaming services on Friday (March 6), the dance track arrives on the same day J Lo kicks off her latest Las Vegas residency. It marks Lopez's first release since the Kiss of the Spider Woman soundtrack dropped last year, which followed 2024's This Is Me … Now. The latter debuted at No. 38 on the Billboard 200.
The singer has spent the past week or so getting listeners hyped up for “Save Me Tonight,” posting videos of herself dancing to the track with her “crew” on Instagram. She's also been preparing fans for her JLo Show residency at The Colosseum at Caesar's Palace, which lasts until March 28.
Guetta has been active throughout the beginning of 2026. In addition to his team-up with Lopez, the DJ has shared collaborations with Hypaton, Jaden Bojsen, Teddy Swims, Trippie Red and more artists in recent months. In November, he produced a remix of RAYE's Billboard Hot 100 hit “Where Is My Husband!” Before that, he produced a remix of HUNTR/X's Oscar-nominated KPop Demon Hunters hit “Golden.”
Despite his busy slate of releases, Guetta recently revealed that he's also had some big changes in his personal life. Just a week prior to the release of “Save Me Tonight,” the EDM titan revealed that he'd welcomed his fourth child, writing on Instagram that baby Skyler is the “most beautiful secret” he's ever kept.
Listen to Lopez and Guetta's “Save Me Tonight” below.
Get weekly rundowns straight to your inbox
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *
Post Comment
A daily briefing on what matters in the music industry
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
A daily briefing on what matters in the music industry
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Billboard is a part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2026 Billboard Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
The 'Gilmore Girls' alum played Harry 'Sully' Sullivan on the romantic drama for three seasons.
By
Carly Thomas
Senior Editor, Digital
Sullivan's Crossing fans will be missing a friendly face from the upcoming fourth season.
Scott Patterson, who plays Harry ‘Sully' Sullivan, the estranged father Maggie Sullivan (Morgan Kohan) has reconnected with, took to Instagram on Thursday to share his side as to why he won't be returning for the new season, which is set to premiere on April 20.
“Every actor knows what it's like to fall in love with a character and a story. I fell in love with Sully and have nothing but fondness for him,” he wrote. “The creative differences were becoming untenable and I just sadly realized that the show was not something that I could agree to continue.”
Related Stories
TV
'Gilmore Girls' Turns 25: Cast and Creator Spill Casting Secrets, Talk Show's Popularity and Hopes for a Movie
TV
'Gilmore Girls' Stars Lauren Graham, Scott Patterson Reunite in New Walmart Holiday Ad
Patterson wanted to set the record straight regarding his reasoning for exiting the show, as he claims other people speaking out aren't telling the whole truth. While he didn't name anyone specific, Sullivan's Crossing showrunner Roma Roth previously told People that Patterson's absence in the new season was due to how season three ended.
“Season 3 of Sullivan's Crossing ended with Sully leaving for Ireland, beginning a new chapter in his life. Season 4 picks up the next day, with Sully still overseas,” Roth said, adding, “The character remains an important part of the world with the potential to be included in future seasons should that align with the ongoing creative.”
However, the Gilmore Girls alum has a different perspective on the situation. “It's unfortunate that it is now being implied that they moved on from me/Sully when the fact is the complete opposite, and those who sadly already have spoken out are also fully aware of this fact, and yet chose to say otherwise,” he wrote. “I was not intending to make any statement but the fans of the books and the show deserve to know the truth as I have always been respectful of those who support this industry by watching and loving these characters we are so dang lucky and blessed to portray and bring to life.”Patterson concluded his post, “I really enjoyed Sully and fought for his voice and his character. The richness and depth of Sully, whom the fans of the books all know and love, is so multi-layered and interesting. The fans deserved better than to think the embodiment of this character, me, would just disrespect not only the show, but them. In the end, we're all fans of these characters and stories, and I'll always support and defend the truth.”
Sullivan's Crossing follows neurosurgeon Maggie Sullivan, who reconnects with her small-town past after a scandal causes her to leave her professional and personal life behind in the city.
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
Inside the business of TV with breaking news, expert analysis and showrunner interviews
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Two contestants who came in third in a recent season of The Amazing Race have just launched a defamation lawsuit against CBS, Paramount, and producer ABC Signatures, essentially alleging that the show gave them an edit so bad that it constituted a “smear strategy” that would “shock the conscience of even the most cynical propagandist.”
Specifically, Deadline reports that contestants Jonathan and Ana Towns, who competed on the 37th season of the long-running reality competition, have launched a lawsuit against the network and production company, seeking $8 million in damages over their portrayal on the series. Which was, admittedly, not especially flattering: Fans of the series were especially unkind to Jonathan's on-screen attitude toward his wife, which was frequently described as dismissive and rude. Or, to put it in some very explosive lawsuit language: “The resulting broadcast, disseminated to tens of millions of viewers on a nationally distributed television network, falsely portrayed Jonathan Towns, a private individual with no antecedent public profile, as a morally depraved, brutal and abusive spouse.”
Noting that Jonathan Towns has since been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, the suit alleges that producers on the series failed to assist him during a “meltdown” and “clear emotional anguish” during filming, instead reassuring the Towns that they should continue the show. The suit claims that the Towns' complaints go beyond “legitimate editorial judgment or discretion,” calling producers' choices of which material to show “a calculated and sustained course of conduct in which Defendants… made the deliberate determination to suppress those materials and to substitute in their place a constructed, false, and highly damaging portrayal.”
The Towns, who reportedly won $10,000 for coming in third place on the series, launched a podcast about their time on the show when the season began airing last year. (Including Jonathan addressing his behavior across the season, calling it “less than exemplary.) Now apparently feeling a bit more litigious, the duo aren't just seeking financial damages with their suit: They also want a public apology for their depiction on the series, and for the episodes to be re-edited to feature “appropriate disclaimers” in regards to Jonathan Towns' condition—requests that will have to contend with the typically pretty comprehensive and tightly drawn release forms and waivers that contestants sign in order to participate in shows of this ilk.
Recommended for You1Hijack season 2 reaches its dull destination2Eccentric and uneasy, Heel puts a teen through obedience school3Industry's Myha'la and Marisa Abela on their gutting finale conversation4Ted McGinley steals the show in this week's Shrinking5David Zaslav reaps more benefits of Paramount offer by unloading $114 million of WBD stock
© 2026 Paste Media Group. All Rights Reserved
Britney Spears reportedly had a productive conversation with her mom and sons following her DUI arrest.
Spears' mother, Lynne Spears, called the singer as soon as she became aware of her arrest, TMZ reported Thursday. Lynne reportedly had a “positive” and “hopeful” conversation with her daughter after offering her support.
Britney also talked to her sons — Sean Preston, 20, and Jayden James, 19 — after being released from jail Thursday, the outlet reported, but she hasn't seen any family members in person.
Advertisement
Page Six has reached out to Spears' rep for comment.
Advertisement
Spears' relationship with her sons, whom she shares with ex-husband Kevin Federline, has been rocky over the years. She was reportedly hurt over Sean choosing not to spend the holidays with her and Jayden last year because he “wasn't ready to meet her halfway.”
Last month, she blasted her family in a scathing Instagram post.
“For those of you in your family that have (sic) said to help you is to isolate you and make you feel unbelievably left out … they were wrong. We can forgive as people but u don't ever forget,” she wrote.
“I'm incredibly lucky to even be alive with how my family treated me once in my life and now I'm scared of them,” she added.
Advertisement
Start your day with Page Six Daily.
Please provide a valid email.
By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Want celebrity news as it breaks?
Spears was arrested in Ventura County, Calif., for driving under the influence Wednesday night at around 9:28 p.m. local time, Page Six confirmed.
Advertisement
She was released at 6:07 a.m. Thursday, according to the Ventura County Sheriff's inmate record.
Spears, 44, was believed to be under the influence of a cocktail of drugs and alcohol during her arrest.
We're told she was pulled over after allegedly driving her black BMW “erratically at a high rate of speed” while near the Borchard Road off-ramp in Newbury Park.
Additionally, an insider close to the pop icon told Page Six that officers found an unknown substance inside her car at the time of her arrest.
Her chemical test results are still pending, and the investigation is still ongoing.
The Grammy-winning singer was “crying and very tearful” while being booked for her DUI arrest, Page Six also learned.
Advertisement
“She was incredibly emotional,” a source exclusively told us. “It's been a very hard couple of months.”
Advertisement
According to our source, Spears “felt ashamed and embarrassed” and is “very sorry” for what happened.
“She doesn't want to let anyone down, including her fans,” the insider added. “The last thing she wants is to be judged publicly all over again.”
Spears' manager, Cade Hudson, gave a blunt statement after her arrest, calling it an “unfortunate incident that is completely inexcusable.”
“Britney is going to take the right steps and comply with the law and hopefully this can be the first step in long overdue change that needs to occur in Britney's life,” he said in a statement obtained by Page Six. “Hopefully, she can get the help and support she needs during this difficult time.”
Michelle Pfeiffer is proving she's a timeless beauty in back-to-back appearances.
On Tuesday night, Pfeiffer, 67, attended the Yves Saint Laurent Womenswear show during Paris Fashion Week.
Advertisement
The actress was in head-to-toe YSL and wore a black blazer with matching slacks.
She rolled her sleeves up to about her elbows and wore green heels with a dramatic pointed toe.
Pfeiffer tied the look together with gold bangles and a sheer shirt underneath.
The “Scarface” icon shared photos to Instagram, and she was instantly flooded with praise.
Advertisement
“Absolutely stunning show! 🔥 Thank you for having me, @ysl @anthonyvaccarello 🤍,” Pfeiffer captioned her post.
“I think shes absolutely gorgeous 😍 god bless her and actress that's had a wonderful career,” one user wrote.
Another added, “Still gorgeous 😍 ♥️.”
“AS ALWAYS, so beautiful! Slay Queen!” a third user wrote. “Still incredibly beautiful ❤️🥰,” another added.
Advertisement
The next day, Pfeiffer attended the U.K. premiere of “The Madison.”
Pfeiffer stuck to a pearl theme for premiere night and wore a mid-length black Oscar de la Renta dress, fully embellished with pearls.
Advertisement
She accessorized with matching pearl earrings and rings and wore a pair of Gianvito Rossi black pumps.
On Wednesday, Pfeiffer took to Instagram and shared a video from moments on the red carpet.
“Beautiful night in one of my favorite places celebrating @themadisonpplus. 🤍🤠,” she captioned her post.
On the carpet, Pfeiffer posed with members of “The Madison” cast, including Kurt Russell.
Pfeiffer leads the “Yellowstone” spinoff, which is a “heartfelt study of grief and human connection following a New York City family in the Madison River valley of central Montana,” according to a synopsis of the show.
Aside from Pfeiffer and Russell, “The Madison” stars Beau Garrett, Elle Chapman, Patrick J. Adams, Amiah Miller, Alaina Pollack, Ben Schnetzer, Kevin Zegers, Rebecca Spence, Danielle Vasinova and Matthew Fox.
In January, the first stills from the highly anticipated show were released.
Advertisement
Pfeiffer sat in a wooden rocking chair on a porch.
Pfeiffer's character, Stacy Clyburn, is described as the “heart of the family,” and she was holding a book in the shot.
In another image, Russell's character, Preston Clyburn, sits on a tree stump looking off into the distance.
Advertisement
Other stills show Russell with Fox fly-fishing in a stream in Montana.
A press release for the series says “The Madison” is “a profound love story channeled through a deeply personal family drama about resilience and transformation.”
Start your day with Page Six Daily.
Please provide a valid email.
By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Want celebrity news as it breaks?
It also mentioned that this is Taylor Sheridan's “most intimate work to date.”
Advertisement
The series unfolds “across two distinct worlds — the beautiful landscape of Montana and the vibrant energy of Manhattan — as it examines the ties that bind families together,” the release stated.
The first season of “The Madison” consists of six episodes and will premiere on Paramount+ March 14.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
The streetwear drop brings the girl group's signature style to iconic Disney characters.
By
Erin Lassner
E-Commerce Writer
If you purchase an independently reviewed product or service through a link on our website, The Hollywood Reporter may receive an affiliate commission.
Inspired by Blackpink‘s signature edge and far-reaching cultural influence, Disney‘s Global Creative Director Bobby Kim has reimagined beloved characters and heritage visuals through a '70s London punk style lens in first-ever Blackpink x Disney clothing capsule.
The Complex-exclusive collaboration, available online starting March 5, includes 10 limited-edition pieces, each sold with a collection-exclusive photocard featuring one of four Blackpink members: Jennie, Jisoo, Lisa or Rosé. The launch comes just days after the release of Deadline, the K-pop supergroup's first multi-track drop in over three years.
Related Stories
Lifestyle
Ahead of the Oscars, DIRECTV Offering Limited-Time Deal on Live TV Packages
Lifestyle
15 Chanel Gifts You Can Get for Under $100
Priced between $35 and $125, Complex's Blackpink x Disney capsule includes tanks, tees, sweatshirts, baseball caps, tote bags and the pièce de résistance: a pink and black plaid jacket finished with custom pinback buttons ($125).
Related Video
Minnie Mouse and Blackpink logo printed on back.
Blackpink logo also printed on back.
“This punk-inspired collection is all about expressing your individuality and challenging the status quo with confidence,” says Kim. “As a global pop-culture phenomenon, BLACKPINK's fearless creativity and boundary-breaking style are at the heart of this capsule, making them the ideal creative force to kick off a high-impact series of collections with Complex.”
Color: charcoal.
Clothing sizes range from small to 2XL, and each product page indicates whether to expect a slim or unisex fit. All pieces are currently available for preorder, with estimated ship dates between four and 11 weeks. Shop the full Blackpink x Disney assortment, while supplies last, at Complex.com. Each item in the collection comes with one exclusive Disney x Blackpink collectible photocard (one random out of four). We recommend acting fast, as select inventory is already sold out at time of publish.
Mickey, Minnie, and Blackpink logos are printed across the bag's exterior.
Related: Stoney Clover Lane Revives Sold-Out Disney Princess Prints With New Bag Styles
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
A female member of the Academy's 719-person documentary branch who has no connection to any of this year's nominees, granted a cloak of anonymity in return for candor, speaks with THR about her ballot.
By
Scott Feinberg
Executive Editor of Awards
A female member of the Academy's 719-person documentary branch who has no connection to any of this year's nominees, granted a cloak of anonymity in return for candor, speaks with THR about her ballot.
Best picture
I put Frankenstein at number 10 because I haven't seen it, which is unfair, but I ran out of time and decided to check the box indicating that I had so that I could support other films. F1 was not for me — I watched about 45 minutes of it, and I didn't need to watch more. I'm a huge fan of Yorgos Lanthimos, but Bugonia, while I admired its ambition and performances, did not work for me. I liked Train Dreams and thought it was visually beautiful, but I grew a little tired of the character's point of view and didn't find it especially unique. Marty Supreme was a great ride, but it ultimately felt like more of the same stuff we've seen from the Safdies, even if this one was just Josh. I admired The Secret Agent's performances and design, but was not as captivated by the narrative as I wanted to be. Hamnet was emotional and beautifully rendered, but a bit overwrought — I didn't want Jessie [Buckley] turned up to a 10 the entire time. To me, One Battle After Another, Sinners and Sentimental Value are all best picture-worthy. I loved One Battle, but there were flaws — I heard from a lot of friends in the Black community that they were troubled by the character Perfidia Beverly Hills, and I really hear that. With Sinners, I was leaning forward in my seat with my mouth open for the entire movie — it was so ambitious, profound, provocative and entertaining. But at the end of the day, I put Sentimental Value on top because it was, to me, exquisite, nearly perfect, and my kind of movie.
Related Stories
Movies
Maggie Gyllenhaal Loved Those 'The Bride!' Test Screenings: "The Fantasy of It Being Some Horrible Thing Is Inaccurate"
Movies
Maggie Gyllenhaal on How She Crafted Jessie Buckley and Christian Bale's Looks in 'The Bride!'
VOTE: (1) Sentimental Value, (2) Sinners, (3) One Battle After Another, (4) Hamnet, (5) The Secret Agent, (6) Marty Supreme, (7) Train Dreams, (8) Bugonia, (9) F1, (10) Frankenstein
Related Video
Best director
I found [Sentimental Value's Joachim] Trier's direction of his actors and design of his film to be outstanding — but I have to go with [Sinners' Ryan] Coogler. The director is the conductor of all of the crafts that go into a movie, and Sinners was so gorgeously conducted, such a big swing, so ambitious and so unique.
VOTE: Ryan Coogler, Sinners
Best actor
[Timothée] Chalamet is great in Marty Supreme, but the character felt a bit redundant after the prior Safdie films. Michael B. Jordan is incredible in Sinners. Wagner Moura's performance in The Secret Agent is the main reason to watch that movie. I was very tempted to vote for Leo [DiCaprio for One Battle]. But Ethan Hawke's performance in Blue Moon is inspired, magnetic, almost magical.
VOTE: Ethan Hawke, Blue Moon
Best actress
Rose Byrne brought everything to If I Had Legs I'd Kick You — I mean, with the way the filmmaker chose to focus on her face, she was mesmerizing, and it was a tour de force. But I felt that [Sentimental Value's] Renate Reinsve gave the most stunning performance of the year. She just got into my heart.
VOTE: Renate Reinsve, Sentimental Value
Best supporting actorSean Penn is incredible [in One Battle], as he usually is. I love Stellan [Skarsgård] in Sentimental Value, who is also always so good. But for me, it was between Delroy [Lindo of Sinners] and Benicio [Del Toro of One Battle], and I went with the Sensei because of the way in which I understand Benicio helped to craft that character. I saw some interviews about how he brought to PTA all of these ideas about the apartment and other things, and how they really worked together to build that character, who is the spiritual heart of the film. I have friends to my left who felt it made fun of activism, and friends to my right who found it to be too celebratory, and I would always point to Benicio's character as an ideal for this moment — someone with deep community ties who knows how to open doors and make things happen. I'll never forget that performance.
VOTE: Benicio del Toro, One Battle After Another
Best supporting actress
While I'm a fan of One Battle After Another, Teyana Taylor's character was tough for me to swallow. Wunmi [Mosaku, in Sinners] and Amy [Madian, in Weapons] are great. Though I loved Sentimental Value, I don't think Elle Fanning had much to do. But Inga [Ibsdotter Lilleaas, Fanning's costar] is getting my vote. The nuance that Inga and Renate Reinsve brought to that sibling relationship was incredible, and the scene of the two of them in the bedroom is one of the best-performed scenes of the year.
VOTE: Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas, Sentimental Value
Best adapted screenplay
I liked Train Dreams, but I saw the lack of a well-explored female point-of-view as a weakness. As an adaptation, Hamnet is incredible, but it just felt overwrought to me. I haven't read the source material of One Battle, and I understand the film veers pretty significantly from it, but even so, the characters are so compelling and the story is so of the moment.
VOTE: One Battle After Another
Best original screenplay
I liked the Blue Moon screenplay, but without Ethan doing with it what he did, it's less remarkable. Obviously, Sinners is strong in my book. But I went with Sentimental Value because of its exquisitely-observed exploration of family relationships.
VOTE: Sentimental Value
Best animated feature
When my kids were little I used to be much more up to speed on this category, but now I'm not, so I'm sitting it out.
VOTE: Abstain
Best documentary featureCutting Through Rocks is the kind of film that the doc branch has been celebrating too much in recent years — it's not extremely well-made, it underserved its central character and it lacked gravitas. But I'm happy to report that the other four nominees are fantastic. The Alabama Solution, Come See Me in the Good Light and The Perfect Neighbor, in particular, are incredibly well-crafted, feel urgent, and teach us something about human nature. Any of those three could win and it would be fine with me. The Alabama Solution is an incredible piece of journalism and I'm really glad that HBO has supported it and it's getting the love it's getting. Come See Me in the Good Light changed the way I look at love and dying, and I could see voting for it if The Perfect Neighbor wasn't in the running. But The Perfect Neighbor left me gobsmacked. It's an innovation of the form, with incredible characters, and captured the American imagination when it was released. Geeta [Gandbhir, the director] is beloved in the doc branch, is a good human, and has played the award season game very well, positioning herself as a leader in the Academy on key issues of our time.
VOTE: The Perfect Neighbor
Best international featureI'd heard so much hype about It Was Just an Accident that when I saw it I was a little underwhelmed, sadly — maybe I was expecting something more intense. Sirāt is so thrilling, but it's not quite as full a meal as some of the others. Again, I loved The Secret Agent's main performance, directing and style, but I was not as drawn in, from a narrative perspective, as I was by The Voice of Hind Rajab and Sentimental Value. The Voice of Hind Rajab is an imperfect but extremely compelling and urgent film for this moment. But ultimately, Sentimental Value is one of the best movies of the year. The filmmaking and performances were extraordinary. It reminded me of another one of my favorite international movies from a couple of years back, Anatomy of a Fall, in terms of its exploration of complex family relationships and female characters. It has it all.
VOTE: Sentimental Value, Norway
Best casting
All of the nominees were incredibly well cast, but here is a place where I felt I could recognize Marty Supreme. Those New York characters and faces were just brilliant and one of my favorite things about that movie. They provided another layer of storytelling to it.
VOTE Marty Supreme
Best cinematographyAgain, I haven't seen Frankenstein, but I've seen the four other nominees, so I decided to vote. Marty Supreme, like all the Safdie films, is thrilling — they have such an incredible visual style — but I've seen it before from them. Train Dreams is beautiful. One Battle was shot so incredibly, especially the chase scene. But I went with Sinners. The [surreal] sequence in the dance hall is one of the most unforgettable sequences of the year.
VOTE: Sinners
Best costume design
Even though I haven't seen Frankenstein, I feel like I know enough from the marketing to know that its costumes are not the sort of thing that would grab me. Of the others, Sinners is the obvious choice — the costumes were a huge part of the storytelling, telling us who the characters were and weren't.
VOTE: Sinners
Best film editingMarty Supreme is very flashy in terms of its editing, and while I thoroughly enjoyed it, again, I felt like I'd seen it before in other Safdie movies that I liked more. Sinners and Sentimental Value are two of my favorite films of the year, but I'm not sure that they deserve to be recognized for their editing as much as other things. With One Battle, you buckle in and the two hours and 40 minutes or whatever breeze right by. The pacing is very impressive.
VOTE: One Battle After Another
Best makeup and hairstylingI unfortunately have to sit this one out because I've only seen one of the five nominees.
VOTE: Abstain
Best original score
I'm sitting out this one because I just don't have time to listen to the scores a few times and make an informed decision.
VOTE: Abstain
Best original song
Same thing here as score.
VOTE: Abstain
Best production design
No-brainer: Sinners.
VOTE: Sinners
Best sound
The sound design in One Battle was awesome — it takes place in so many different environments. But Sirāt is a really special film that deserves some recognition, and this is one of the craft areas in which it excels.
VOTE: Sirāt
Best visual effects
It would be easy for me to just vote for Sinners, but I haven't seen any of the other nominees, so I can't do it.
VOTE: Abstain
Best animated short
I ran out of time and did not get to see the nominees.
VOTE: Abstain
Best documentary short
I'm a little mystified by the state of play for doc shorts. It seems like nobody watches them and streamers just buy them to try to get a piece of hardware. In general, the quality of the craft is not very high. None of these five were particular standouts to me. But I voted for Geeta's film [Gandbhir also co-directed The Devil Is Busy].
VOTE: The Devil Is Busy
Best live-action short
Same as the animated shorts.
VOTE: Abstain
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Look: We're not necessarily arguing that the bit in 1995's Ace Ventura sequel When Nature Calls in which a nude Jim Carrey births himself from a synthetic rhino asshole is the funniest scene in the film. But it certainly has a decent claim on the title of “most formative,” entering a pantheon of “well-known comedian emerges from orifice” sequences that live in our memories, right alongside Danny DeVito getting popped out of a couch in It's Always Sunny In Philadelpha, and the whole “elephant's vagina” subplot in Sascha Baron Cohen's The Brothers Grimsby. (It's normal to have those scenes on mental speed-dial, right?)
Now, a whole generation has an exciting new opportunity to own its trauma, as the rhino butt in question is up on the auction block. And for an amount that is, honestly, shockingly cheap: PropStore Auction, which is selling the piece—which was formerly on display at Planet Hollywood, where families could reminisce happily about a greased Carrey sliding onto the African earth while chowing down on their burgers and onion rings—lists its starting price at a mere $2,000, with an expected final price between $4,000 and $8,000. (Compare a recent Bruce Lee Game Of Death jumpsuit that's currently going for $130,000—despite, when you think about, also just being a series of connected holes that a famous person once stuck his head through.)
Admittedly, the practicalities of owning the rhino may be a bit more daunting than hanging up Lee's old hand-me-downs in a display case: The rhino apparently measures a full 10 feet from tip to foam-latex tail, complete with an interior cavity you can sit in, possibly while yelling at your wife to just stay and talk to you, damn it, this was an investment. In one of the more pleasant sets of sentences we've encountered in a minute, meanwhile, the listing also talks about how all the ways the “butt birth” rhino—their words, not ours—has been restored over the years, including replacing many of its latex components with hard-coated Styrofoam. “Additionally, the latex butt skin sheet was replaced, likely due to the original being torn for filming.” Just luxuriate in those words, dear reader. Don't they feel just a little bit like coming home?
Recommended for You1Hijack season 2 reaches its dull destination2Eccentric and uneasy, Heel puts a teen through obedience school3Industry's Myha'la and Marisa Abela on their gutting finale conversation4Ted McGinley steals the show in this week's Shrinking5David Zaslav reaps more benefits of Paramount offer by unloading $114 million of WBD stock
© 2026 Paste Media Group. All Rights Reserved
The FBI has joined in the search for a retired U.S. Air Force general who has gone missing in New Mexico.
FBI agents and investigators from the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office were seen canvassing the neighborhood where Maj. Gen. William Neil McCasland was last seen, KRQE in Albuquerque reports. McCasland, 68, retired as the commander of a research division at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton, Ohio.
This is what we know.
The Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office issued a Silver Alert for McCasland, who has been missing since last week, Newsweek reports. He was last seen on Feb. 27 in Albuquerque. McCasland is 5 feet 11 inches tall and weighs about 160 pounds. He has white hair and blue eyes, and he has unspecified medical issues, according to the sheriff's office, which is worried about his safety.
McCasland was the commander of the Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton, according to his Air Force biography. He managed a $2.2 billion science and technology program as well as $2.2 billion in additional customer-funded research and development. He joined Wright-Patterson in 2011 and retired in 2013.
He was commissioned in 1979 after graduating from the U.S. Air Force Academy with a Bachelor of Science degree in astronautical engineering. He has served in a wide variety of space research, acquisition and operations roles within the Air Force and the National Reconnaissance Office.
The FBI will join a missing persons case at the request of state or local law enforcement, according to the U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Resource Manual, making available the resources of the FBI Identification Division and the FBI Laboratory.
The FBI may also open and lead a missing persons case if foul play is suspected, if the person was on federal land — such as a national park — or if the missing person is a U.S. president or federal official — such as cabinet members, members of Congress or federal judges, among others,according to true crime podcaster Jerri Williams. Williams was an FBI special agent for 26 years.
McCasland was described as a key adviser on UFO-related projects by Tom DeLonge, UFO researcher and guitarist for the band Blink-182, Newsweek reports. The general's name appears in the 2016 WikiLeaks email release from John Podesta, then Hillary Clinton's campaign manager.
In emails to Podesta, DeLonge said he has been working with McCasland for months and that the general was aware of the materials DeLonge was probing because McCasland has been “in charge of the laboratory at Wright‑Patterson Air Force Base where the Roswell wreckage was shipped,” according to Newsweek.
However, there is no official record of DeLonge's claims, and McCasland has neither confirmed nor denied it.
The Dayton Air Force base was home to Project Blue Book in the 1950s and '60s, according to "The Air Force Investigation into UFOs" published by Ohio State University.
During that time, it logged 12,618 UFO sightings, with 701 of those remaining “unidentified.” The U.S. government created the project because of Cold War-era security concerns and Americans' obsession with aliens.
This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: FBI joins hunt for retired Wright-Patterson general who went missing
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
A "historically anchored" Roswell movie is coming, while filmmakers ranging from Steven Spielberg to Joseph Kosinski tout upcoming UAP-themed titles: "This movie is going to blow people's minds."
By
James Hibberd
Writer-at-Large
It's quietly become a trendy new genre in Hollywood: The serious UFO movie.
An invasion of projects across the narrative and documentary space are exploring the topic of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs), including prestige films from Steven Spielberg and Top Gun: Maverick director Joseph Kosinski.
While movies about spacecraft and aliens are as old as filmmaking, this wave is heavily influenced by recent real-world events — a perhaps unprecedented level of media, lawmaker and public interest in videos and discussion of UAPs, which has included congressional hearings, the emergence of government whistleblowers, and the release of much-debated Navy footage of objects that some claim defy the laws of physics.
Related Stories
General News
After 'F1: The Movie,' Damson Idris Gets Green Light to Join Formula 1 as Global Brand Ambassador
Guest Column
Coppola, Lucas and Spielberg Rewrote Hollywood's Rules in the Chaotic 70s. Who's Doing That Now?
The truth, in other words, has gone from being “out there” to feeling just around the corner.
Popular on THR
The latest project in the mix: Producer and podcaster Bryce Zabel (Dark Skies, Taken) has just packaged a film with UTA that's billed as “the most grounded, historically anchored” look at the 1947 Roswell incident yet. Sylvain White (The Boys, Fargo) is attached to direct.
Titled Unidentified, the fact-based tale moves across three timelines: The infamous 1947 incident where the U.S. Air Force announced — then quickly retracted — that it had recovered a “flying disc,” a 1990s narrative focusing on Roswell investigators racing to secure testimony from witnesses and a present-day murder mystery looking into mysterious deaths related to the incident. The film focuses on nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman and author Donald Schmitt, who endeavored to figure out “the truth” behind the story. The film is partly based on Witness to Roswell, which Schmitt wrote with Thomas Carey.
“Roswell no longer feels like folklore — it feels like unfinished business,” says Zabel, who just launched an iHeart podcast on the UAP topic titled Sound, Light & Frequency. “Instead of seeing Roswell as pop culture, our whole package — script, director, IP — treats it like a crime scene. This isn't a movie about little green men. This is about what happens to ordinary people when the impossible crashes into their lives. These two researchers are American heroes who never gave up and found hundreds of witnesses to this event.”
And then there are the heavy hitters wading into this: Spielberg has his Universal film Disclosure Day, about the global panic and societal upheaval when humanity receives undeniable proof that aliens exist. While Jerry Bruckheimer is producing a UFO disclosure thriller for Apple Original Films, directed by Kosinski (Top Gun: Maverick), that's been described as a “UFO-themed All the President's Men.” Congressional UAP whistleblower David Grusch is attached as a consultant on the Kosinski film. There's even a new reboot of The X-Files in the works for Hulu with Sinners writer-director Ryan Coogler.
“This topic is fascinating and it's been fun to find people who are really into it, because it's a hole you can disappear into when you're talking to the people who are in the middle of it,” Kosinski tells The Hollywood Reporter. “There's so much information that is not public yet about various things. This movie is going to blow people's minds.”
To some extent, minds have already been a bit blown — or at least perplexed — by real-world events. Last year, a buzzy documentary, filmmaker Dan Farah's The Age of Disclosure, contained interviews with 34 current and former government officials discussing UAPs. The film reportedly broke Prime Video's VOD record for its highest-grossing documentary of all time when it dropped in November.
And in the last two weeks, Barack Obama made global headlines for casually saying aliens are “real” — before clarifying he meant aliens likely exist somewhere in the universe. His remarks spurred Donald Trump to raise eyebrows by claiming Obama had revealed classified information, and the president then announced on Feb. 20 he would declassify and release files related to UFOs/UAPs.
“The zeitgeist of our moment right now is the UFO, UAP reality issue,” Zabel says. “I think we are seeing more and more projects come forward because people are now becoming aware for the first time that this is a serious thing and it's not crazy. You couldn't have two presidents that are more different than Obama and Trump, and yet both of them are entertaining the possibility that this is real. And with Obama, it's very similar to the Roswell thing — you tell the truth and then you have to buy it back.”
Next up is Spielberg's Disclosure Day, which drops June 12. Spielberg has been fascinated by the UFO topic his whole career, with his 1977 classic Close Encounters of the Third Kind still considered by many to be the most compelling dramatization of the subject. In a behind-the-scenes video discussing Disclosure Day, Spielberg said, “People's questions about what is not only going on in our skies but what is going on in our worlds, in our realities, has reached a critical mass of people's complete fascination with: Are we alone, or are we not alone? And if someone knows we're not alone, why have we not been told?”
Spielberg's film has been generating some conspiracies online given its tagline (“All Will Be Disclosed”) and its title's similarity to The Age of the Disclosure documentary. Put simply: Some believe the documentary and Disclosure Day are part of a coordinated government-Hollywood movement to prepare humanity for the near-term disclosure of alien life. The fact that Farah was a producer on Spielberg's Ready Player One has added fuel to this, and the narrative has gone into overdrive since Obama and Trump's viral comments. It's unclear if such confusion over Spielberg's film will help or hurt its box office potential (Universal declined to discuss its marketing for the film).
To be clear, there have been plenty of reports pushing back on the UAPs-as-aliens narrative, though they tend to get less attention than the “it's aliens!” claims. A Wall Street Journal story last June reported that the Pentagon has seeded and encouraged UFO myths as a way of providing cover for real top-secret test flights of cutting-edge aircraft. The Pentagon has also resolutely maintained they have found no sign of alien life in reported UFO sightings going back decades. Similarly, new NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman recently told The New York Times he has not seen any evidence — secret or otherwise — that his agency has encountered proof of alien life.
There are UFO believers who blend these two seemingly conflicting ideas: That most orbs and crafts and lights in the sky are indeed not-yet-revealed U.S. military technology, which has been reverse engineered from (you guessed it) retrievals of crashed alien spacecraft — like the one at Roswell.
For Farah, who says he was firmly convinced by his Age of Disclosure documentary participants, the real-world disclosure movement and the pop cultural side naturally travel hand in hand.
“Film has always helped usher in cultural transformation and accelerate change,” Farah said. “We wouldn't be living through this extraordinary time without the cultural impact Steven Spielberg made with Close Encounters of the Third Kind and E.T. We're now seeing multiple films about the existence of non-human intelligent life being covered up by the U.S. Government because we are living in the age of disclosure—the moment in history in which we learn we are not alone in the universe and that the truth has been kept from us for 80 years.” — Beatrice Verhoeven contributed to this report.
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
A scoop-driven, insider view of Hollywood's genre and blockbuster movie landscape, led by Borys Kit and Aaron Couch.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
A "historically anchored" Roswell movie is coming, while filmmakers ranging from Steven Spielberg to Joseph Kosinski tout upcoming UAP-themed titles: "This movie is going to blow people's minds."
By
James Hibberd
Writer-at-Large
It's quietly become a trendy new genre in Hollywood: The serious UFO movie.
An invasion of projects across the narrative and documentary space are exploring the topic of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs), including prestige films from Steven Spielberg and Top Gun: Maverick director Joseph Kosinski.
While movies about spacecraft and aliens are as old as filmmaking, this wave is heavily influenced by recent real-world events — a perhaps unprecedented level of media, lawmaker and public interest in videos and discussion of UAPs, which has included congressional hearings, the emergence of government whistleblowers, and the release of much-debated Navy footage of objects that some claim defy the laws of physics.
Related Stories
General News
After 'F1: The Movie,' Damson Idris Gets Green Light to Join Formula 1 as Global Brand Ambassador
Guest Column
Coppola, Lucas and Spielberg Rewrote Hollywood's Rules in the Chaotic 70s. Who's Doing That Now?
The truth, in other words, has gone from being “out there” to feeling just around the corner.
Popular on THR
The latest project in the mix: Producer and podcaster Bryce Zabel (Dark Skies, Taken) has just packaged a film with UTA that's billed as “the most grounded, historically anchored” look at the 1947 Roswell incident yet. Sylvain White (The Boys, Fargo) is attached to direct.
Titled Unidentified, the fact-based tale moves across three timelines: The infamous 1947 incident where the U.S. Air Force announced — then quickly retracted — that it had recovered a “flying disc,” a 1990s narrative focusing on Roswell investigators racing to secure testimony from witnesses and a present-day murder mystery looking into mysterious deaths related to the incident. The film focuses on nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman and author Donald Schmitt, who endeavored to figure out “the truth” behind the story. The film is partly based on Witness to Roswell, which Schmitt wrote with Thomas Carey.
“Roswell no longer feels like folklore — it feels like unfinished business,” says Zabel, who just launched an iHeart podcast on the UAP topic titled Sound, Light & Frequency. “Instead of seeing Roswell as pop culture, our whole package — script, director, IP — treats it like a crime scene. This isn't a movie about little green men. This is about what happens to ordinary people when the impossible crashes into their lives. These two researchers are American heroes who never gave up and found hundreds of witnesses to this event.”
And then there are the heavy hitters wading into this: Spielberg has his Universal film Disclosure Day, about the global panic and societal upheaval when humanity receives undeniable proof that aliens exist. While Jerry Bruckheimer is producing a UFO disclosure thriller for Apple Original Films, directed by Kosinski (Top Gun: Maverick), that's been described as a “UFO-themed All the President's Men.” Congressional UAP whistleblower David Grusch is attached as a consultant on the Kosinski film. There's even a new reboot of The X-Files in the works for Hulu with Sinners writer-director Ryan Coogler.
“This topic is fascinating and it's been fun to find people who are really into it, because it's a hole you can disappear into when you're talking to the people who are in the middle of it,” Kosinski tells The Hollywood Reporter. “There's so much information that is not public yet about various things. This movie is going to blow people's minds.”
To some extent, minds have already been a bit blown — or at least perplexed — by real-world events. Last year, a buzzy documentary, filmmaker Dan Farah's The Age of Disclosure, contained interviews with 34 current and former government officials discussing UAPs. The film reportedly broke Prime Video's VOD record for its highest-grossing documentary of all time when it dropped in November.
And in the last two weeks, Barack Obama made global headlines for casually saying aliens are “real” — before clarifying he meant aliens likely exist somewhere in the universe. His remarks spurred Donald Trump to raise eyebrows by claiming Obama had revealed classified information, and the president then announced on Feb. 20 he would declassify and release files related to UFOs/UAPs.
“The zeitgeist of our moment right now is the UFO, UAP reality issue,” Zabel says. “I think we are seeing more and more projects come forward because people are now becoming aware for the first time that this is a serious thing and it's not crazy. You couldn't have two presidents that are more different than Obama and Trump, and yet both of them are entertaining the possibility that this is real. And with Obama, it's very similar to the Roswell thing — you tell the truth and then you have to buy it back.”
Next up is Spielberg's Disclosure Day, which drops June 12. Spielberg has been fascinated by the UFO topic his whole career, with his 1977 classic Close Encounters of the Third Kind still considered by many to be the most compelling dramatization of the subject. In a behind-the-scenes video discussing Disclosure Day, Spielberg said, “People's questions about what is not only going on in our skies but what is going on in our worlds, in our realities, has reached a critical mass of people's complete fascination with: Are we alone, or are we not alone? And if someone knows we're not alone, why have we not been told?”
Spielberg's film has been generating some conspiracies online given its tagline (“All Will Be Disclosed”) and its title's similarity to The Age of the Disclosure documentary. Put simply: Some believe the documentary and Disclosure Day are part of a coordinated government-Hollywood movement to prepare humanity for the near-term disclosure of alien life. The fact that Farah was a producer on Spielberg's Ready Player One has added fuel to this, and the narrative has gone into overdrive since Obama and Trump's viral comments. It's unclear if such confusion over Spielberg's film will help or hurt its box office potential (Universal declined to discuss its marketing for the film).
To be clear, there have been plenty of reports pushing back on the UAPs-as-aliens narrative, though they tend to get less attention than the “it's aliens!” claims. A Wall Street Journal story last June reported that the Pentagon has seeded and encouraged UFO myths as a way of providing cover for real top-secret test flights of cutting-edge aircraft. The Pentagon has also resolutely maintained they have found no sign of alien life in reported UFO sightings going back decades. Similarly, new NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman recently told The New York Times he has not seen any evidence — secret or otherwise — that his agency has encountered proof of alien life.
There are UFO believers who blend these two seemingly conflicting ideas: That most orbs and crafts and lights in the sky are indeed not-yet-revealed U.S. military technology, which has been reverse engineered from (you guessed it) retrievals of crashed alien spacecraft — like the one at Roswell.
For Farah, who says he was firmly convinced by his Age of Disclosure documentary participants, the real-world disclosure movement and the pop cultural side naturally travel hand in hand.
“Film has always helped usher in cultural transformation and accelerate change,” Farah said. “We wouldn't be living through this extraordinary time without the cultural impact Steven Spielberg made with Close Encounters of the Third Kind and E.T. We're now seeing multiple films about the existence of non-human intelligent life being covered up by the U.S. Government because we are living in the age of disclosure—the moment in history in which we learn we are not alone in the universe and that the truth has been kept from us for 80 years.” — Beatrice Verhoeven contributed to this report.
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
A scoop-driven, insider view of Hollywood's genre and blockbuster movie landscape, led by Borys Kit and Aaron Couch.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
A "historically anchored" Roswell movie is coming, while filmmakers ranging from Steven Spielberg to Joseph Kosinski tout upcoming UAP-themed titles: "This movie is going to blow people's minds."
By
James Hibberd
Writer-at-Large
It's quietly become a trendy new genre in Hollywood: The serious UFO movie.
An invasion of projects across the narrative and documentary space are exploring the topic of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs), including prestige films from Steven Spielberg and Top Gun: Maverick director Joseph Kosinski.
While movies about spacecraft and aliens are as old as filmmaking, this wave is heavily influenced by recent real-world events — a perhaps unprecedented level of media, lawmaker and public interest in videos and discussion of UAPs, which has included congressional hearings, the emergence of government whistleblowers, and the release of much-debated Navy footage of objects that some claim defy the laws of physics.
Related Stories
General News
After 'F1: The Movie,' Damson Idris Gets Green Light to Join Formula 1 as Global Brand Ambassador
Guest Column
Coppola, Lucas and Spielberg Rewrote Hollywood's Rules in the Chaotic 70s. Who's Doing That Now?
The truth, in other words, has gone from being “out there” to feeling just around the corner.
Popular on THR
The latest project in the mix: Producer and podcaster Bryce Zabel (Dark Skies, Taken) has just packaged a film with UTA that's billed as “the most grounded, historically anchored” look at the 1947 Roswell incident yet. Sylvain White (The Boys, Fargo) is attached to direct.
Titled Unidentified, the fact-based tale moves across three timelines: The infamous 1947 incident where the U.S. Air Force announced — then quickly retracted — that it had recovered a “flying disc,” a 1990s narrative focusing on Roswell investigators racing to secure testimony from witnesses and a present-day murder mystery looking into mysterious deaths related to the incident. The film focuses on nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman and author Donald Schmitt, who endeavored to figure out “the truth” behind the story. The film is partly based on Witness to Roswell, which Schmitt wrote with Thomas Carey.
“Roswell no longer feels like folklore — it feels like unfinished business,” says Zabel, who just launched an iHeart podcast on the UAP topic titled Sound, Light & Frequency. “Instead of seeing Roswell as pop culture, our whole package — script, director, IP — treats it like a crime scene. This isn't a movie about little green men. This is about what happens to ordinary people when the impossible crashes into their lives. These two researchers are American heroes who never gave up and found hundreds of witnesses to this event.”
And then there are the heavy hitters wading into this: Spielberg has his Universal film Disclosure Day, about the global panic and societal upheaval when humanity receives undeniable proof that aliens exist. While Jerry Bruckheimer is producing a UFO disclosure thriller for Apple Original Films, directed by Kosinski (Top Gun: Maverick), that's been described as a “UFO-themed All the President's Men.” Congressional UAP whistleblower David Grusch is attached as a consultant on the Kosinski film. There's even a new reboot of The X-Files in the works for Hulu with Sinners writer-director Ryan Coogler.
“This topic is fascinating and it's been fun to find people who are really into it, because it's a hole you can disappear into when you're talking to the people who are in the middle of it,” Kosinski tells The Hollywood Reporter. “There's so much information that is not public yet about various things. This movie is going to blow people's minds.”
To some extent, minds have already been a bit blown — or at least perplexed — by real-world events. Last year, a buzzy documentary, filmmaker Dan Farah's The Age of Disclosure, contained interviews with 34 current and former government officials discussing UAPs. The film reportedly broke Prime Video's VOD record for its highest-grossing documentary of all time when it dropped in November.
And in the last two weeks, Barack Obama made global headlines for casually saying aliens are “real” — before clarifying he meant aliens likely exist somewhere in the universe. His remarks spurred Donald Trump to raise eyebrows by claiming Obama had revealed classified information, and the president then announced on Feb. 20 he would declassify and release files related to UFOs/UAPs.
“The zeitgeist of our moment right now is the UFO, UAP reality issue,” Zabel says. “I think we are seeing more and more projects come forward because people are now becoming aware for the first time that this is a serious thing and it's not crazy. You couldn't have two presidents that are more different than Obama and Trump, and yet both of them are entertaining the possibility that this is real. And with Obama, it's very similar to the Roswell thing — you tell the truth and then you have to buy it back.”
Next up is Spielberg's Disclosure Day, which drops June 12. Spielberg has been fascinated by the UFO topic his whole career, with his 1977 classic Close Encounters of the Third Kind still considered by many to be the most compelling dramatization of the subject. In a behind-the-scenes video discussing Disclosure Day, Spielberg said, “People's questions about what is not only going on in our skies but what is going on in our worlds, in our realities, has reached a critical mass of people's complete fascination with: Are we alone, or are we not alone? And if someone knows we're not alone, why have we not been told?”
Spielberg's film has been generating some conspiracies online given its tagline (“All Will Be Disclosed”) and its title's similarity to The Age of the Disclosure documentary. Put simply: Some believe the documentary and Disclosure Day are part of a coordinated government-Hollywood movement to prepare humanity for the near-term disclosure of alien life. The fact that Farah was a producer on Spielberg's Ready Player One has added fuel to this, and the narrative has gone into overdrive since Obama and Trump's viral comments. It's unclear if such confusion over Spielberg's film will help or hurt its box office potential (Universal declined to discuss its marketing for the film).
To be clear, there have been plenty of reports pushing back on the UAPs-as-aliens narrative, though they tend to get less attention than the “it's aliens!” claims. A Wall Street Journal story last June reported that the Pentagon has seeded and encouraged UFO myths as a way of providing cover for real top-secret test flights of cutting-edge aircraft. The Pentagon has also resolutely maintained they have found no sign of alien life in reported UFO sightings going back decades. Similarly, new NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman recently told The New York Times he has not seen any evidence — secret or otherwise — that his agency has encountered proof of alien life.
There are UFO believers who blend these two seemingly conflicting ideas: That most orbs and crafts and lights in the sky are indeed not-yet-revealed U.S. military technology, which has been reverse engineered from (you guessed it) retrievals of crashed alien spacecraft — like the one at Roswell.
For Farah, who says he was firmly convinced by his Age of Disclosure documentary participants, the real-world disclosure movement and the pop cultural side naturally travel hand in hand.
“Film has always helped usher in cultural transformation and accelerate change,” Farah said. “We wouldn't be living through this extraordinary time without the cultural impact Steven Spielberg made with Close Encounters of the Third Kind and E.T. We're now seeing multiple films about the existence of non-human intelligent life being covered up by the U.S. Government because we are living in the age of disclosure—the moment in history in which we learn we are not alone in the universe and that the truth has been kept from us for 80 years.” — Beatrice Verhoeven contributed to this report.
Sign up for THR news straight to your inbox every day
A scoop-driven, insider view of Hollywood's genre and blockbuster movie landscape, led by Borys Kit and Aaron Couch.
Subscribe for full access to The Hollywood Reporter
Send us a tip using our anonymous form.
Advertisement
For premium support please call:
For premium support please call:
The truth about aliens may be out there, but don't expect them to look like little green men, RadarOnline.com can report.
Extraterrestrial experts are trying to temper expectations and predictions about space invaders, admitting they have no idea what an "alien" could actually look like.
After Barack Obama turned heads by revealing he believes "aliens are real" but hasn't seen them, scientists say it's likely the strange visitors from other planets may look nothing like we'd expect.
"It's hard for us to assert," Bill Diamond, president and chief executive of SETI – The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence Institute — told NewsNation's Jesse Weber Live. "And for anybody to assert that we have some idea or for anybody to assert that, well, they are probably like the popular images that we see of tall, spindly creatures with big eyes and green skin. We have no idea."
A 2025 poll found nearly half of Americans believe the federal government is hiding evidence related to UFOs. But Diamond tempered expectations by explaining that there are specific reasons why we, as humans, look the way we do.
"We do have a lot in common with a lot of other species on Earth," Diamond said. "We have a skeletal system, which provides a physical frame on which our bodies are constructed. Our central nervous systems are embedded. We have binocular vision. We have stereo hearing. We have sensory perception.
"These are all survival mechanisms. They turn out to be rather important, and therefore, they become common elements across species."
In a conversation with podcast host Brian Tyler Cohen, former President Obama seemingly confirmed the existence of aliens during a lighthearted "lightning round" of queries.
Advertisement
Obama shockingly responded that extraterrestrials are real but that he hasn't "seen them."
"And they're not being kept in… what is it? Area 51," he continued at the time. "There's no underground facility unless there's this enormous conspiracy and they hid it from the president of the United States."
The ex-commander-in-chief was then asked what the first question he wanted to answer upon becoming president was, and, while laughing, he said, "Where are the aliens?"
We could soon have answers, after President Trump recently directed several federal agencies to review UFO files and release them to the public, tasking Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to look into it.
"We're digging in," Hegseth said on C-SPAN. "We're going to be in full compliance with that executive order, eager to provide that for the president. There will be more coming on that as far as the process of what we'll do."
Trump last month ordered his loyal workers to "begin the process of identifying and releasing government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life, unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), and unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and any and all other information connected to these highly complex, but extremely interesting and important, matters."
The president has always been open about the possibility of aliens, telling Joe Rogan in 2024 there's "no reason" not to believe there are other beings besides humans.
"They told me a lot," the 79-year-old claimed at the time, adding, "I have to be honest. I have never been a believer. I have people that Area 51 or whatever it is. I think it's the number one tourist attraction in the whole country or something. Area 51 in Las Vegas."
Advertisement
We earn a commission for products purchased through some links in this article.
The boys are back in town.
The final season of The Boys is almost here, and the Supernatural men are back together in the first trailer.
The fifth installment of Amazon Prime Video's hit superhero show will be the last after first hit our screens back in 2019.
As fans eagerly await the latest season premiere on 8 April, the latest trailer shows us the first look at the onscreen reunion of Supernatural stars Jensen Ackles, Jared Padalecki and Misha Collins after their casting was announced last year.
Related: Best streaming services UK 2026 — including Disney Plus, Netflix, iPlayer and Apple TV+
Footage shows Antony Starr's iconic villain Homelander waking up his father Soldier Boy (Ackles) from cryogenic stasis to team up in a bid for world domination.
As they continue to wreak havoc, they encounter two characters played by Padalecki and Collins, with Soldier Boy choking Collins' character while Padalecki looks on in shock.
Details of their characters have been kept tightly under wraps, but it is an onscreen reunion that has been years in the making following the finale of Supernatural back in 2020.
They're not the first stars from the show to appear in The Boys, with Jeffrey Dean Morgan starring in season four.
Other newcomers for season five include Stranger Things' Mason Dye and Hamilton's Daveed Diggs.
Related: The Boys prequel casts new mystery role alongside Jensen Ackles
A synopsis for the upcoming final episodes teases the mayhem that is set to ensue, reading: "It's Homelander's world, completely subject to his erratic, egomaniacal whims. Hughie (Jack Quaid), Mother's Milk (Laz Alonso), and Frenchie (Tomer Capone) are imprisoned in a ‘Freedom Camp'.
"Annie (Erin Moriarty) struggles to mount a resistance against the overwhelming Supe force. Kimiko (Karen Fukuhara) is nowhere to be found. But when Butcher (Karl Urban) reappears, ready and willing to use a virus that will wipe all Supes off the map, he sets in motion a chain of events that will forever change the world and everyone in it."
It continues with the promise, "It's the climax, people. Big stuff's gonna happen, and it's gonna be f*****n' diabolical."
The Boys seasons one to four and spin-off Gen V are streaming on Prime Video. Season five will be released on 8 April.
Read more The Boys and Gen V news on our dedicated homepage
The Boys star looks unrecognisable in new biopic
"Twisty" streaming hit confirms September return
New crime drama shoots up trending charts
New crime drama will 'have audiences hooked'
The Boys' Erin Moriarty reveals medical diagnosis
Gritty drama gets s2 trailer and release date
Grey's Anatomy star's new show confirms release
The Boys spin-off Gen V is "better than season 1"
The Boys prequel casts new mystery role
Supernatural stars reunite for The Boys season 5
The Boys fans "can't wait" for season 5
Stranger Things star joins The Boys season 5
DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK
We earn a commission for products purchased through some links in this article.
©2026 Hearst UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 30 Panton Street, Leicester Square, London, SW1Y 4AJ. Registered in England. All Rights Reserved.