Russia’s FSB Says It Thwarted Ukraine-Linked Plot To Assassinate RT Editor-In-Chief
Russian media is widely reporting that RT editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan was targeted in an assassination plot, uncovered and thwarted by the country’s Federal Security Service (FSB).
According to RIA Novosti, the FSB announced Saturday that members of a neo-Nazi group which goes by the name ‘Paragraph 88’ had been arrested in connection with the alleged plot, which apparently was busted before any attempt.
Authorities said that the group was also preparing to target prominent Russian journalist and former presidential candidate, Ksenia Sobchyak.
The neo-Nazi members were alleged to have “carried out intelligence at the addresses of work and residence of Simonyan and Sobchak” – or were allegedly casing their residences in preparation for some kind of attack.
A report in TASS cited that six people have been detained in connection with the plot, and are expected to appear in a Moscow court.
Simonyan put out a statement which was featured in RT. She explained, “The most important thing I want to say is that there are things worse than death. Dishonor is worse than death; treason is worse than death.”
She also said that the detained young alleged perpetrators of the plot had been “brainwashed” – this after the FSB identified some of them as minors. According to claims made in RT:
Earlier, the Russian Federal Security Service, which detained five members of a neo-Nazi group suspected of being behind the plan, released footage showing the questioning of an 18-year-old man. In the video, he was seen confessing to organizing a neo-Nazi group and later to taking orders from Ukrainian intelligence in exchange for money.
Simonyan commented further, “I am very sorry that a 18-year-old boy… was brainwashed in such a way… that he decided that caring for his people is compatible with taking money from Ukrainian intelligence to kill opinion leaders in his own country.”
The FSB detailed that suspected plotters were preparing the assassination attempt “on the instructions of the Security Service of Ukraine for a reward of 1.5 million rubles ($16,600) for each murder.”
The past year has proven that indeed there have been assassination plots targeting high profile Russians, with the deaths of Darya Dugina and war blogger Vladlen Tatarsky being foremost examples. These were widely believed to be operations backed by Ukraine intelligence in the context of the war, to instill fear on Russian decision-makers and the population.
The California State Board of Education approved a new math framework on July 12 that has generated controversy. Critics argue that the framework promotes teaching political activism to children instead of focusing on math skills and standards.
The framework, outlined in a 1,000-page guidance document, underwent four years of revision and three drafts based on public feedback.
The critics claim that the framework incorporates concepts of social justice, political activism, and environmental justice into the math curriculum. They argue that the emphasis on these topics detracts from the mastery of math skills.
On the other hand, proponents, such as Mary Nicely, the state’s chief deputy superintendent of public instruction, believe that the framework provides equitable access to math instruction.
“The framework has struck a great balance in new ways to engage students in developing a love for math while supporting those on an accelerated path,” Ms. Nicely said in a statement.
“Our State Superintendent is a champion of equity and excellence, and it is our core mission that every child—regardless of race, ZIP code, or background—has access to a quality education.”
The guidance outlines key strategies such as structuring math instruction around integrated “big ideas,” emphasizing problem-solving and critical thinking, connecting math to real-world applications, incorporating culturally relevant content, fostering inquiry-based learning, and promoting fluency in math concepts and algorithms.
Opponents of the framework, represented by SaveMath.net, founded by private math tutor and former teacher Michael Malione, raise concerns about the lack of vetting for the concept of “big ideas” and the limited involvement of individuals with advanced math degrees in its development.
Mr. Malione argues on his website that the framework’s focus on “social justice” will harm students and that it devotes too little attention to math content standards.
“Typically, a curriculum framework would orient around the content standards regarding when and how they should be taught—to provide guidance to educators, parents, and textbook publishers. The SFR draft framework does not,” he states on his website.
Mr. Malione points out that the framework promotes the use of math to explore concepts of fairness in relation to various social issues and encourages student political activism. It also emphasizes racial justice, equity, gender inclusivity, and trauma-informed pedagogy in math education.
“One would think the proposed math framework would focus on describing how to convey the required math subject content in detail, but unfortunately, it does not,” his website states.
The state’s framework from 2013, by contrast, devotes 66 percent “of its total text (approximately 7,200/10,900 lines of text) to implementing math content standards.”
The California State Board of Education states that the framework aims to align math concepts across grade levels, ensure equal access to high school math pathways, provide multiple approaches to support student progress, expand course options, and develop data literacy skills.
Linda Darling-Hammond, president of the California State Board of Education, praised the framework for its focus on excellence with equity.
Change is imperative, she believes, as the United States has been ineffective and inequitable in teaching math.
“We are one of the lower-achieving countries—and California is below the national average in its achievement in mathematics,” Ms. Darling-Hammon said, adding that this is an “area of great need, and change is imperative.”
“The same old, same old will not get us to a new place,” Ms. Darling-Hammond added.
On July 13, 2021, more than 1,000 people, including math and science professors, business professionals, and venture capitalists, signed an open letter from the Independent Institute to Gov. Gavin Newsom expressing concerns about certain elements of an earlier version of the framework. That letter appeared to force revisions to parts of the framework.
Although revisions have been made to the framework, critics argue that it still maintains an emphasis on social justice principles, which they believe introduces political agendas into math teaching and may have detrimental effects. They claim that the framework replaces the traditional focus on math with a politicized approach.
“It replaces a focus on ‘math class’ with something more akin to a sociology class, adopting a politicized stance of learning and applying math in a one-sided interpretation,” Mr. Malione states on his website.
According to Bill Evers, director of the Center on Educational Excellence at the Independent Institute, the framework remained highly politicized after an earlier version was revised.
In a previous statement to The Epoch Times, Mr. Evers said he believes that the curriculum emphasizes political and teaching dogma, with math problems still framed within social and environmental contexts.
“They still want the teachers to be social justice warriors themselves, and they want them to turn out new social justice warriors and environmental activists,” he said.
India Launches (Another) Lunar Mission To Explore South Pole
On Thursday of this week, India launched a rocket carrying a spacecraft for its lunar mission from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre located in the southern state of Andhra Pradesh Friday, in an ambitious second attempt at putting a lander and a rover on the moon amid several other global efforts to explore the lunar surface.
Chandrayaan-3, the word for “moon craft” in Sanskrit, took off from a launchpad in Sriharikota with an orbiter, a lander and a rover, in a demonstration of India’s emerging space technology.
India’s previous attempt to land a robotic spacecraft near the moon’s little-explored south pole ended in failure in 2019. It entered the lunar orbit but lost touch with its lander that crashed while making its final descent to deploy a rover to search for signs of water. According to a failure analysis report submitted to the ISRO, the crash was caused by a software glitch.
The $140-million mission in 2019 was intended to study permanently shadowed moon craters that are thought to contain water deposits and were confirmed by India’s Chandrayaan-1 mission in 2008.
Reaching the moon is something only three other nations have achieved.
As Statista’s Martin Armstrong details, on September 14, 1959, The Soviet Union’s Luna 2 spacecraft became the first man-made object to make contact with the Moon – slamming into its surface and completing its lunar impactor mission.
After that momentous achievement, the USSR shifted its focus away from impactors, and eventually became the first country, in 1966, to successfully complete a soft landing on the Moon.
A few months later, NASA‘s Surveyor 1 became the first U.S. spacecraft to conduct a soft lunar landing – a mission which paved the way for the manned Apollo missions and eventually Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin becoming the first humans to set foot on the celestial body’s surface.
Despite the USSR’s early space race dominance, the United States is still to this day the only country to have successfully landed humans on the Moon – having done so another five times after the famous Apollo 11 mission. Having fallen down the priority list of most space agencies since the heights of the sixties, landing on the Moon has come back into focus in recent years. China became the first country to soft land a spacecraft on the ‘dark’ or ‘far’ side of the Moon, when the Chang’e 4 lander touched down and deployed the Yutu-2 lunar rover in December 2018.
India is the only other country to have landed on the moon by way of an impactor or lander mission (others have done so but only as the final stage of an orbiter mission, crashing down onto the surface with self-destruction their only objective).
After orbiting the Moon for 312 days, Chandrayaan-1 deployed a moon impact probe in November 2008, releasing underground debris that, after analysis by the orbiter, confirmed the presence of water. The mission also made India the first to complete a hard landing on the lunar south pole.
Off the back of this success, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) turned its attention to a soft lunar landing.
In September 2019, Chandrayaan-2 crashed during a landing attempt, with the orbiter remaining operational.
ISRO Director Sreedhara Panicker Somanath said, shortly after this week’s launch of Chandrayaan-3, that the Indian space agency has perfected the art of reaching up to the moon, “but it is the landing that the agency is working on.”
If India is successful with Chandrayaan-3, they will be the first country to land near the Moon’s south pole, which has not been explored as much as other parts of its surface.
The first part has gone well, India’s space agency says.
But we will now need to wait until at least 23 August to see if India can do something no one else has ever done – and land on the south side of the moon.
Central planners are pulling double shifts. Contriving plans and proposals to control what you consume, how you travel and cook, where your money is spent, and much, much more.
You know who we’re talking about. The Davos WEF crowd. The UN, IMF, World Bank, and central bankers. Washington lobbyists, NGOs, public/private partnerships, technical advisory committees, nonprofits, and everything in between. We’re also talking about your meddling neighbor, and many others.
What’s their deal? Do they think they’re making the world a better place? And, if so, a better place for who – them or you?
Could something more devious be guiding their advancements?
In Das Kapital, for example, Karl Marx bemoans capitalism for exploiting labor to produce surplus value. His main gripe was that 19th century laborers worked for mere wages while some factory owners got incredibly rich.
To eradicate this class struggle, as he perceived it, Marx proposed a socialist mode of production coordinated through conscious economic planning. He believed that distributing products “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” would bring about his vision of a workers’ paradise.
Many people took the bait hook, line, and sinker. They were all in. The promise of something for nothing administered by the state was too enticing to pass up.
Yet any country that has ever attempted to put these ridiculous ideas into practice has been left with an economy that fails to deliver the abundance for all which Marx advertised. Moreover, this comes at the expense of individual freedom and liberty.
Das Schnitzel
In this regard, what would Marx think of the political economy that’s currently pervading much of the western world?
Would he be in favor of the vast, elite political class that’s living off the surplus value produced by capitalism? Would he deduce that the political class is, therefore, exploiting labor?
Maybe this would be a troublesome conclusion for a man who’s writing serves as justification for using politics to direct capital and boss people around…so long as it’s for the greater good – whatever that may be.
The growth of government in many countries over the last 120 years has been rather extreme. And as governments have grown in scope and reach, a massive administrative state has been erected to advance its will. This is all money down the rathole.
National defense, especially in the United States, is the ultimate slayer of capital. However, more recently, the supposed climate crisis has supplied a unique justification for massive government intervention, under the cover of providing for the greater good.
Energy, transportation, finance, residential development, agriculture, mining, technology, appliances, media, education and on and on. There’s hardly a sector of the economy that hasn’t been corrupted by climate crisis politics.
The excuse it provides for government intervention on a grand scale seems to produce a religious experience among the conditioned masses.
The examples range far and wide. In Marx’s homeland, for instance, the German government is currently putting the final touches on its planned National Nutrition Strategy, as outlined in a recent paper titled, “Towards the Federal Government’s Nutrition Strategy”.
The objective is to transform the food system, while fighting climate change and minimizing the slaughter of innocent animals.
This, in short, means replacing schnitzel consumption with plants.
Future Primitive
The strategy paper notes that Germany’s agricultural and food systems generate approximately one quarter of its greenhouse gas emissions. And to meet its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2045 it needs to transform how food is produced.
“The transformation of the entire food system towards a plant-based diet is the most important adjusting screw in the nutrition sector to achieve our national and international climate, biodiversity, and sustainability goals.”
Organic farming and promoting seasonal, regionally grown, plant-based foods are some of the transformation strategies proposed. We think the national nutrition planners are asking for trouble.
Whenever a central planning authority has commanded what crops to plant, and the means and methods for agricultural production, disaster has followed. In fact, top-down planning of food production has been responsible for the world’s greatest collective famines.
The rollout of centralized agriculture by the Soviet Union was responsible for an estimated 6 to 9 million human deaths in the Soviet famine of 1930 to 1933. Gosplan’s five-year plans missed the mark, spectacularly. Alas, more struggle was needed.
Similarly, Mao’s Great Leap Forward some 30 years later brought on the Great Chinese Famine. As the production quotas of planned farming fell short, something rather curious happened. The numbers reported to the central government increased. Everything looked great on paper.
But everything wasn’t great. In truth, everything was terrible. The human death toll estimates for this man induced starvation range from 15 to 55 million.
Nonetheless, the planners are at it again. All for the supposed intent of controlling the weather.
Implementation of Germany’s National Nutrition Strategy is expected to begin in 2025. Perhaps the country will succeed where others have failed, though it seems unlikely.
Ultimately, it will depend on how far they take it. The further they push it. The more they will fail. Here’s why…
Are You Willing to Starve for the Greater Good?
The economy is a complex living organism. It continuously evolves and is always subject to change. One relationship at one moment can be completely different at another moment.
Supply and demand are incessantly adjusting and readjusting to meet the conditions of the market. These continuous interactions provide a natural and efficient response to supply shortages and gluts.
In the case of agriculture, in countries with minimal government interference the food supply is almost always in abundance. Any shortages are quickly resolved.
In an economy with minimal government interference, a farmer doesn’t look to a governing board to know what crops to produce. He looks to prices.
If the price of wheat is high. That means the supply of wheat is low. Thus, he plants wheat. Because, at that moment, wheat is what people need most. Price signals communicate this.
But once the supply of wheat increases, and the price falls, he may look for other crop options to maximize the value of his land. Perhaps milo, or some other cattle feed, is demanding a higher price.
Consequently, he plants milo. The cows then get fed, and an adequate supply of milk is brought to the market.
But once the excess supply of harvested wheat has been consumed. And its price increases. He goes back to planting wheat. Through it all, stomachs remain full, and prices remain within orbit.
Central planners refuse to accept this bottoms up, organic disorder for naturally determining supply and distributing goods and services. They want to step all over it. They want to plan and control things. They want to direct the flow of capital to preferred industries and providers. And they want to take a cut from the action.
And when the foolish planners attempt to circumvent market determined price signals, bad stuff happens.
Sometimes the supply of a certain good crashes and its price skyrockets – and the planners blame the mess of their own making on greedy capitalists. They may even try to exploit it through exacting a windfall profits tax.
Occasionally, however, and when there’s a good enough excuse, the planners make things especially ugly. And entire populations starve.
Are you willing to starve for the greater good?
* * *
Is the Pentagon secretly provoking China to attack Taiwan? Are your finances prepared for such madness? Answers to these important questions can be found in a unique Special Report. You can access a copy here for less than a penny.
In particular, California’s Death Valley could mark the hottest temperature ever recorded on earthwith Scientific American warning that heat could surpass 130-degrees this weekend.
Temperatures in Death Valley could rocket past their usual, already-mind-boggling typical values because of a heat dome that has trapped sizzling hot air over the southern tier of the U.S. Records could also be set in Las Vegas, Nev., Phoenix, Ariz. and parts of Southern California. Phoenix has already seen 14 days in a row with high temperatures at or above 110 degrees F, which is the third-longest such stretch on record. -Scientific American
Hilariously, while Scientific American attributes the recent warming to “greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere by humans burning fossil fuels,” the publication also notes that “The WMO, which keeps official global weather records, places the hottest temperature ever measured on Earth at 134 degrees F; this reading was taken in Death Valley on July 10, 1913.“
Ah yes, 1913. When greenhouse gasses emitted by man were [checks data] 90% lower than they are today.
We digress.
The record temperatures come amid a warning from the National Weather Service over “sweltering and dangerous heat” blanketing the West.
As of 6pm ET this evening, the widespread and extensive nature of excessive heat warnings and heat advisories cover over 100 million people. This weekend the sweltering and dangerous heat will remain in the forecast, especially across much of the West. Practice heat safety! pic.twitter.com/a26ZBjKQ93
Meanwhile in Las Vegas, emergency room doctors are seeing a flood of dehydrated construction workers, passed-out old folks and other victims of the intense heat, as the city’s all-time record of 117-degrees may also be breached this weekend.
“We’ve been talking about this building heat wave for a week now, and now the most intense period is beginning,” the National Weather Service wrote on Friday.
In fact, nearly one-third of Americans are under extreme heat advisories, watches and warnings, AP reports.
“This heatwave is NOT typical desert heat due to its long duration, extreme daytime temperatures, & warm nights. Everyone needs to take this heat seriously, including those who live in the desert,” the NWS’s Las Vegas office said in a tweet.
Phoenix, Arizona suffered through its 15th consecutive day of temperatures over 110 degrees on Friday, hitting a high of 116 by late afternoon. The longest stretch of temps above 110 degrees in the city was 18 days, recorded in 1974 (when scientists were convinced we’d all freeze to death due to global cooling).
“This weekend there will be some of the most serious and hot conditions we’ve ever seen,” said Phoenix’s chief heat officer (?), David Hondula, adding “I think that it’s a time for maximum community vigilance.”
A world in which machines governed by artificial intelligence (AI) systematically replace human beings in most business, industrial, and professional functions is horrifying to imagine. After all, as prominent computer scientists have been warning us, AI-governed systems are prone to critical errors and inexplicable “hallucinations,” resulting in potentially catastrophic outcomes. But there’s an even more dangerous scenario imaginable from the proliferation of super-intelligent machines: the possibility that those nonhuman entities could end up fighting one another, obliterating all human life in the process.
The notion that super-intelligent computers might run amok and slaughter humans has, of course, long been a staple of popular culture. In the prophetic 1983 film “WarGames,” a supercomputer known as WOPR (for War Operation Plan Response and, not surprisingly, pronounced “whopper”) nearly provokes a catastrophic nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union before being disabled by a teenage hacker (played by Matthew Broderick). The “Terminator” movie franchise, beginning with the original 1984 film, similarly envisioned a self-aware supercomputer called “Skynet” that, like WOPR, was designed to control U.S. nuclear weapons but chooses instead to wipe out humanity, viewing us as a threat to its existence. Though once confined to the realm of science fiction, the concept of supercomputers killing humans has now become a distinct possibility in the very real world of the near future.
In addition to developing a wide variety of “autonomous,” or robotic combat devices, the major military powers are also rushing to create automated battlefield decision-making systems, or what might be called “robot generals.” In wars in the not-too-distant future, such AI-powered systems could be deployed to deliver combat orders to American soldiers, dictating where, when, and how they kill enemy troops or take fire from their opponents. In some scenarios, robot decision-makers could even end up exercising control over America’s atomic weapons, potentially allowing them to ignite a nuclear war resulting in humanity’s demise.
Now, take a breath for a moment. The installation of an AI-powered command-and-control (C2) system like this may seem a distant possibility. Nevertheless, the U.S. Department of Defense is working hard to develop the required hardware and software in a systematic, increasingly rapid fashion. In its budget submission for 2023, for example, the Air Force requested $231 million to develop the Advanced Battlefield Management System (ABMS), a complex network of sensors and AI-enabled computers designed to collect and interpret data on enemy operations and provide pilots and ground forces with a menu of optimal attack options. As the technology advances, the system will be capable of sending “fire” instructions directly to “shooters,” largely bypassing human control.
“A machine-to-machine data exchange tool that provides options for deterrence, or for on-ramp [a military show-of-force] or early engagement,” was how Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for acquisition, technology, and logistics, described the ABMS system in a 2020 interview. Suggesting that “we do need to change the name” as the system evolves, Roper added, “I think Skynet is out, as much as I would love doing that as a sci-fi thing. I just don’t think we can go there.”
And while he can’t go there, that’s just where the rest of us may, indeed, be going.
Mind you, that’s only the start. In fact, the Air Force’s ABMS is intended to constitute the nucleus of a larger constellation of sensors and computers that will connect all U.S. combat forces, the Joint All-Domain Command-and-Control System (JADC2, pronounced “Jad-C-two”). “JADC2 intends to enable commanders to make better decisions by collecting data from numerous sensors, processing the data using artificial intelligence algorithms to identify targets, then recommending the optimal weapon… to engage the target,” the Congressional Research Service reported in 2022.
AI and the Nuclear Trigger
Initially, JADC2 will be designed to coordinate combat operations among “conventional” or non-nuclear American forces. Eventually, however, it is expected to link up with the Pentagon’s nuclear command-control-and-communications systems (NC3), potentially giving computers significant control over the use of the American nuclear arsenal. “JADC2 and NC3 are intertwined,” General John E. Hyten, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, indicated in a 2020 interview. As a result, he added in typical Pentagonese, “NC3 has to inform JADC2 and JADC2 has to inform NC3.”
It doesn’t require great imagination to picture a time in the not-too-distant future when a crisis of some sort — say a U.S.-China military clash in the South China Sea or near Taiwan — prompts ever more intense fighting between opposing air and naval forces. Imagine then the JADC2 ordering the intense bombardment of enemy bases and command systems in China itself, triggering reciprocal attacks on U.S. facilities and a lightning decision by JADC2 to retaliate with tactical nuclear weapons, igniting a long-feared nuclear holocaust.
The possibility that nightmare scenarios of this sort could result in the accidental or unintended onset of nuclear war has long troubled analysts in the arms control community. But the growing automation of military C2 systems has generated anxiety not just among them but among senior national security officials as well.
As early as 2019, when I questioned Lieutenant General Jack Shanahan, then director of the Pentagon’s Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, about such a risky possibility, he responded, “You will find no stronger proponent of integration of AI capabilities writ large into the Department of Defense, but there is one area where I pause, and it has to do with nuclear command and control.” This “is the ultimate human decision that needs to be made” and so “we have to be very careful.” Given the technology’s “immaturity,” he added, we need “a lot of time to test and evaluate [before applying AI to NC3].”
In the years since, despite such warnings, the Pentagon has been racing ahead with the development of automated C2 systems. In its budget submission for 2024, the Department of Defense requested$1.4 billion for the JADC2 in order “to transform warfighting capability by delivering information advantage at the speed of relevance across all domains and partners.” Uh-oh! And then, it requested another $1.8 billion for other kinds of military-related AI research.
Pentagon officials acknowledge that it will be some time before robot generals will be commanding vast numbers of U.S. troops (and autonomous weapons) in battle, but they have already launched several projects intended to test and perfect just such linkages. One example is the Army’s Project Convergence, involving a series of field exercises designed to validate ABMS and JADC2 component systems. In a test held in August 2020 at the Yuma Proving Ground in Arizona, for example, the Army used a variety of air- and ground-based sensors to track simulated enemy forces and then process that data using AI-enabled computers at Joint Base Lewis McChord in Washington state. Those computers, in turn, issued fire instructions to ground-based artillery at Yuma. “This entire sequence was supposedly accomplished within 20 seconds,” the Congressional Research Service later reported.
Less is known about the Navy’s AI equivalent, “Project Overmatch,” as many aspects of its programming have been kept secret. According to Admiral Michael Gilday, chief of naval operations, Overmatch is intended“to enable a Navy that swarms the sea, delivering synchronized lethal and nonlethal effects from near-and-far, every axis, and every domain.” Little else has been revealed about the project.
“Flash Wars” and Human Extinction
Despite all the secrecy surrounding these projects, you can think of ABMS, JADC2, Convergence, and Overmatch as building blocks for a future Skynet-like mega-network of super-computers designed to command all U.S. forces, including its nuclear ones, in armed combat. The more the Pentagon moves in that direction, the closer we’ll come to a time when AI possesses life-or-death power over all American soldiers along with opposing forces and any civilians caught in the crossfire.
Such a prospect should be ample cause for concern. To start with, consider the risk of errors and miscalculations by the algorithms at the heart of such systems. As top computer scientists have warned us, those algorithms are capable of remarkably inexplicable mistakes and, to use the AI term of the moment, “hallucinations” — that is, seemingly reasonable results that are entirely illusionary. Under the circumstances, it’s not hard to imagine such computers “hallucinating” an imminent enemy attack and launching a war that might otherwise have been avoided.
And that’s not the worst of the dangers to consider. After all, there’s the obvious likelihood that America’s adversaries will similarly equip their forces with robot generals. In other words, future wars are likely to be fought by one set of AI systems against another, both linked to nuclear weaponry, with entirely unpredictable — but potentially catastrophic — results.
Not much is known (from public sources at least) about Russian and Chinese efforts to automate their military command-and-control systems, but both countries are thought to be developing networks comparable to the Pentagon’s JADC2. As early as 2014, in fact, Russia inaugurated a National Defense Control Center (NDCC) in Moscow, a centralized command post for assessing global threats and initiating whatever military action is deemed necessary, whether of a non-nuclear or nuclear nature. Like JADC2, the NDCC is designed to collect information on enemy moves from multiple sources and provide senior officers with guidance on possible responses.
China is said to be pursuing an even more elaborate, if similar, enterprise under the rubric of “Multi-Domain Precision Warfare” (MDPW). According to the Pentagon’s 2022 report on Chinese military developments, its military, the People’s Liberation Army, is being trained and equipped to use AI-enabled sensors and computer networks to “rapidly identify key vulnerabilities in the U.S. operational system and then combine joint forces across domains to launch precision strikes against those vulnerabilities.”
Picture, then, a future war between the U.S. and Russia or China (or both) in which the JADC2 commands all U.S. forces, while Russia’s NDCC and China’s MDPW command those countries’ forces. Consider, as well, that all three systems are likely to experience errors and hallucinations. How safe will humans be when robot generals decide that it’s time to “win” the war by nuking their enemies?
If this strikes you as an outlandish scenario, think again, at least according to the leadership of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, a congressionally mandated enterprise that was chaired by Eric Schmidt, former head of Google, and Robert Work, former deputy secretary of defense. “While the Commission believes that properly designed, tested, and utilized AI-enabled and autonomous weapon systems will bring substantial military and even humanitarian benefit, the unchecked global use of such systems potentially risks unintended conflict escalation and crisis instability,” it affirmed in its Final Report. Such dangers could arise, it stated, “because of challenging and untested complexities of interaction between AI-enabled and autonomous weapon systems on the battlefield” — when, that is, AI fights AI.
Though this may seem an extreme scenario, it’s entirely possible that opposing AI systems could trigger a catastrophic “flash war” — the military equivalent of a “flash crash” on Wall Street, when huge transactions by super-sophisticated trading algorithms spark panic selling before human operators can restore order. In the infamous “Flash Crash” of May 6, 2010, computer-driven trading precipitated a 10% fall in the stock market’s value. According to Paul Scharre of the Center for a New American Security, who first studied the phenomenon, “the military equivalent of such crises” on Wall Street would arise when the automated command systems of opposing forces “become trapped in a cascade of escalating engagements.” In such a situation, he noted, “autonomous weapons could lead to accidental death and destruction at catastrophic scales in an instant.”
At present, there are virtually no measures in place to prevent a future catastrophe of this sort or even talks among the major powers to devise such measures. Yet, as the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence noted, such crisis-control measures are urgently needed to integrate “automated escalation tripwires” into such systems “that would prevent the automated escalation of conflict.” Otherwise, some catastrophic version of World War III seems all too possible. Given the dangerous immaturity of such technology and the reluctance of Beijing, Moscow, and Washington to impose any restraints on the weaponization of AI, the day when machines could choose to annihilate us might arrive far sooner than we imagine and the extinction of humanity could be the collateral damage of such a future war.
First Tesla Cybertruck Rolls Off Production Line At Gigafactory Texas
Tesla tweeted early Saturday morning that the first Cybertruck rolled off the production line at Gigafactory Texas. Four years ago, Elon Musk unveiled the all-electric stainless steel pickup that has encountered a series of production delays.
“First Cybertruck built at Giga Texas!” Tesla tweeted around 0346 ET.
— Tesla Owners Silicon Valley (@teslaownersSV) July 9, 2023
The Tesla Cybertruck is a game-changer for tackling tough terrains, including snow-covered landscapes. The Cybertruck’s tri-motor (quad-motor possibly coming) all-wheel drive provides excellent traction, making it the best contender for snowy conditions. Combined with its high… pic.twitter.com/zrYWgGiVNo
— Tesla Owners Silicon Valley (@teslaownersSV) July 13, 2023
In May, Musk told shareholders at the company’s annual meeting that the Cybertruck was a tough product to design, but that “it will be great.”
EV Blog Electrek recently said Tesla is “planning to produce 375,000 Cybertrucks per year and have release candidates by late August, according to communications they sent to suppliers.”
How long will it take for production to ramp up to fill the 1.5 million reservation holders?
Data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) show that incidence of a common stomach illness is on the rise on cruise ships.
In an update posted several days ago, the federal agency is now listing 13 outbreaks of norovirus on cruise ships this year, which is the highest number of outbreaks recorded on cruises since 2012. The most recent reported norovirus outbreak was on June 20 on a Viking Cruises ship in which about 120 passengers and crew members reported being ill out of about 1,200 people who were on board.
Viking Cruises recently told The Wall Street Journal that it believes the viral outbreak “originated from a shoreside restaurant in Iceland where a group of guests dined during their free time” rather than from someone on the ship.
There were only four norovirus outbreaks on cruise ships during all of 2022, even as demand for cruises surged after COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns.
Federal officials estimate that norovirus infects between 19 million and 21 million people each year on average.
Norovirus is one of the most common viral illnesses on cruises, and it has sometimes been dubbed “the cruise ship virus” owing to widespread media coverage of outbreaks. However, the CDC noted that outbreaks on cruise ships account for a small number of all reported outbreaks of norovirus in the United States.
In May, a Celebrity Cruises trip saw about 152 passengers and 26 crew members get sick with the virus, according to CDC figures. Another case in May also saw 246 passengers and 38 crew contract the virus, the data show.
During a Princess Cruises voyage involving the Ruby Princess, about 10 percent of the 2,881 passengers on board displayed symptoms similar to norovirus, according to the CDC.
It’s likely that more outbreaks will be reported in 2023. The Cruise Lines International Association industry group estimates that cruise passenger volume will reach 106 percent of 2019 levels, with some 31.5 million people expecting to take part.
It remains unclear why there’s a surge in cases this year. The CDC hasn’t issued a comment on the matter, although a spokesperson told CNN that cruise ship travel declined significantly during the pandemic years and that outbreaks were fewer at the time.
The CDC lifted its COVID-19-related risk advisory for cruise travel in March 2022.
“Because cruise ships report illnesses to the CDC, there is more visibility and faster reporting to health authorities, which should not be confused to mean a higher incidence rate onboard,” a spokesperson for the Cruise Lines International Association told The Wall Street Journal last month.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters in Atlanta on April 23, 2020. (Tami Chappell/AFP via Getty Images)
The highly contagious pathogen can cause gastroenteritis. Symptoms include diarrhea, vomiting, and stomach pain, and they can appear one to two days after contracting the virus, according to officials.
It’s generally spread via the accidental ingestion of small particles of fecal matter, eating food contaminated with the virus, touching contaminated surfaces and then touching the eyes or mouth, or being in direct contact with someone who’s sick with the virus, according to officials. The illness is generally more severe in older adults and young children, according to the Arizona Department of Health Services.
Severe cases of the stomach bug can result in dehydration caused by vomiting or diarrhea. However, deaths aren’t common.
Officials recommend that passengers on cruise ships wash their hands more than they typically would. They’re also advised to stay hydrated on hot days and to avoid consuming uncooked vegetables, fruit with edible skin, and ice.
The CDC also recommends disinfecting surfaces with bleach, handling and preparing food safely by washing fruits and vegetables well, cooking shellfish at a high enough temperature, and washing laundry with hot water.
“This is an extraordinarily contagious virus,” Dr. William Schaffner, a professor of infectious diseases at Vanderbilt University, said in a recent interview with CNN.
“It takes but a few normal viral particles to initiate an infection in someone who’s exposed. In other words, this doesn’t take a large dose; it takes only a little bit.”
One thing that passengers can do to mitigate the spread of the virus is to “postpone their trip if they’re not feeling well,” Mr. Schaffner recommended.
“Try to limit the exposure of others on the front end, and take another cruise a month later,” he said.
“You have this highly transmissible virus that’s introduced into an environment, the cruise ship, which is ideally designed for the rapid spread of a communicable disease.
“I think a lot of the public don’t even understand norovirus, let alone how to begin to protect themselves.
“They’re not taking those precautions, those good protection behaviors they learned over the pandemic.”
In 2012, the CDC reported 16 outbreaks of the virus on cruise ships, according to reports.
Crypto “Will Transcend International Currencies” BlackRock CEO Cheerleads As SEC Accepts Bitcoin ETF Application
Having told Fox Business last week that the role of cryptocurrency was largely “digitizing gold,” suggesting US regulators consider how an ETF directly linked to Bitcoin could democratize finance, and has the potential to “revolutionize” the financial system; BlackRock CEO Larry Fink was once again doing the media rounds this week, expounding on his new (flip-flopped) role as crypto-cheerleader.
From crypto-hater in 2017, the CEO of the world’s largest asset-manager is now telling anyone who will listen that crypto will transcend international currencies.
— Squawk on the Street (@SquawkStreet) July 14, 2023
In Fink’s view, cryptocurrencies have a “differentiating value versus other asset classes” in helping diversify portfolios.
“It’s so international it’s going to transcend any one currency,” noted the executive.
As the world’s largest asset manager, and given Fink’s positioning among the globalist elite, one can’t help wonder at why the sudden shift – is this is ‘blow up the dollar, crash the world, force everyone to beg for global centralized currency bailout’ narrative playing out?
“If you look at the value of our dollar, how it depreciated in the last two months and how much it appreciated over the last five years… an international crypto product can really transcend that,” he went on.
“That’s why we believe there’s great opportunities and that’s why we’re seeing more and more interest. And the interest is broad-based [and] worldwide.”
“We believe we have a responsibility to democratize investing. We’ve done a great job, and the role of ETFs in the world is transforming investing. And we’re only at the beginning of that,” Fink stated in the interview.
While it is an initial step in a lengthy regulatory journey, it signals the SEC’s readiness to explore the idea of a spot Bitcoin ETF and assess its potential market effects.
“We are working with our regulators because, as in any new market, if BlackRock’s name is going to be on it, we’re going to make sure that it’s safe and sound and protected,” Fink added.
On Friday, July 14, the regulator announced that it is also in the process of reviewing applications for various funds, including Wise Origin Bitcoin Trust, WisdomTree, VanEck and Invesco Galaxy.
As a reminder, the SEC has yet to approve a spot Bitcoin ETF in the United States; however, in Canada, the financial product is already available. Three significant funds: Purpose Bitcoin, 3iQ CoinShares and CI Galaxy Bitcoin, have been approved by regulators in the country.
A US Navy spy plane flew over the Taiwan Strait on Thursday as China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) was conducting drills to the south of Taiwan.
The US Navy’s Seventh Fleet announced the flight of the Navy P-8A Poseidon, and Taiwan’s Defense Ministry said the plane flew on the south side of the median line, an unofficial barrier that separates the two sides of the Taiwan Strait.
China said it tracked the US aircraft and accused the US of hyping the incident. “The troops of the PLA Eastern Theater Command have tracked and monitored the US aircraft in the whole course, and handled it in line with laws and regulations,” said a spokesperson for the PLA’s Eastern Theater Command.
The US frequently sails warships through the Taiwan Strait, which China views as provocations. Surveillance flights have typically been less frequent but are becoming more common. The last known US flight over the Taiwan Strait took place in April.
Taiwan’s Defense Ministry said PLA ships and planes conducted a third day of drills on Thursday. The ministry also said it detected Chinese aircraft crossing the median line, a barrier the PLA used to avoid but now regularly crosses.
The PLA started regularly crossing the median line after then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) visited Taiwan in August 2022.
Her visit provoked China’s largest-ever military exercises around the island, and the PLA has kept up the pressure as the US and Taiwan continue to boost military and diplomatic ties.
