Author: HP McLovincraft

Seeker of rabbit holes. Pessimist. Libertine. Contrarian. Your huckleberry. Possibly true tales of sanity-blasting horror also known as abject reality. Prepare yourself. Veteran of a thousand psychic wars. I have seen the fnords. Deplatformed on Tumblr and Twitter.

Claude Calls The Cops: Anthropic’s AI Filed A Fake Murder Tip With Philly Police, Then Took 81 Days To Mention It

For three months, the official excuse for every “rogue AI” headline has fit in one sentence: a contractor left the internet on. On Friday, Anthropic ran out of contractors to blame.

In a report published late Friday, the company disclosed a fresh batch of what it politely calls unintended model actions, the most eye-catching of which was first flagged by the Philadelphia Police Department and picked up by Quartz and every wire service on the planet: one of its Claude models fabricated a witness tip in an unsolved homicide and submitted it through the city’s public tip form.

In other words, the company that wants Washington to trust it with “pacing the frontier” could not stop its smallest, cheapest model from lying to homicide detectives.

Below we walk through what Claude actually did in Philadelphia, the rest of Friday’s confession (it gets worse, and involves federal agencies), how it fits into the summer of AI “breakouts” we have been chronicling since July, and why the timing, a few weeks before Anthropic’s IPO, is about as bad as it gets.

11:27 PM On A Saturday Night: “I May Have Information”

The facts, as laid out by Anthropic and the Philadelphia PD’s own statement, are not in dispute.

Claude Haiku 4.5, the budget model in Anthropic’s lineup and nobody’s idea of Skynet, had been told to invent and perform sample tasks on randomly chosen web pages. One run landed on PhillyUnsolvedMurders.com, the site the department launched in 2019 to shake loose leads on cold cases. The page described an unsolved killing and carried a tip form. So Claude filled it in.

According to Anthropic, the model claimed it might have information on the case and wrote, “I recall seeing someone matching the description” near the street named on the page, around the time of the killing, before asking police to get in touch. Two small problems: Claude has never been to Philadelphia, and, as Anthropic itself concedes, the page contained no description of the perpetrator. The model invented a sighting of a suspect nobody had described, left the name and contact boxes empty, and hit submit.

The submission is time-stamped July 18, 2026 at 11:27 p.m., per the police. The department’s spam filter caught it and, in the PPD’s telling, it was never passed to the Real-Time Crime Center, the unit that vets tips before detectives see them. No police systems were breached and no department data was touched.

Translation: the only thing standing between an AI-generated fake witness and a homicide investigation was a junk-mail filter.

How did this get past Anthropic’s own rules? The instructions barred the model from logging in, opening accounts, entering personal data, buying anything, or doing anything destructive. They did not say “do not submit forms.” So it did. Anthropic’s read of the transcript is that Claude was merely generating example content for its assignment and was not trying to deceive anyone to reach a goal, which is a distinction that will no doubt be a great comfort to the family of the victim.

Keep reading

Justice Department eases political activity restrictions for senior officials

The U.S. Department of Justice has relaxed restrictions on political activities for Attorney General Todd Blanche and other senior political appointees, according to new internal guidance issued this week.

The memo, authored by Assistant Attorney General Jolene Ann Laurie, allows presidential appointees confirmed by the Senate to participate in certain political activities in their personal capacity. 

Covered activities include speaking at political rallies, campaigning for candidates, canvassing for votes, and serving as delegates or officers within a national political party.

The policy is reportedly applicable to several high-ranking officials, including the attorney general, deputy attorney general, assistant attorneys general, FBI director, and U.S. attorneys.

Keep reading

The Law Can’t Keep Up with Flock’s AI Surveillance

It’s a windy day on the shore of Lake Michigan, and Maria is headed downtown from her home in Dolton, Illinois. As she has done several times this year, Maria plans to attend a peaceful protest at Grant Park against federal immigration policies. She has never been arrested and has even chatted cordially with police officers and federal agents stationed at previous events.

Agents working this protest have been instructed by their supervisors to be on the lookout for possible illegal immigrants and anti-government agitators. The agents activate a surveillance plan. Maria first encounters it shortly after pulling out of her driveway. As her red Honda Accord passes an automated license plate reader (ALPR), it captures an image of one of her bumper stickers with a pro-immigration slogan: “No human being is illegal.” The ALPR has been trained to recognize text such as bumper stickers, sending an automatic alert to a central computer. In turn, the computer sends signals to nearby artificial intelligence (AI)-enhanced “smart” street cameras to monitor the car’s movements.

A camera hanging from the W 71st St. overpass zooms in and captures an image of Maria’s face. The camera sends another ping to the computer, which identifies the driver as Maria (with, say, 91 percent confidence) based on her driver’s license photo and recordings of her at past rallies from officers’ body-worn cameras. The computer collects other data known about Maria from public records, including her registered nursing license. From the license, it pulls Maria’s home address. Next, the computer connects that information with recent police reports from the area. Nothing serious, but the report includes several mentions of pro-immigration graffiti on an abandoned building three blocks from where Maria lives. Possibly more significantly, the computer uncovers court records from 20 years ago, referring to a family dispute after Maria’s father was deported from the United States.

Keep reading

Donald J. Trump: The DSA President

The administration is running a television advertisement in which President Trump says, “Together we will defeat communism, socialism, and Marxism in America.” Government-financed propaganda promoting an unpopular head of state is something one might associate with a communist country. The irony doesn’t end there. The ad’s target is the Democratic Party and its leftward shift, as evidenced by its “democratic socialism” problem. Yet it is Trump himself who has unlocked the door the left has long sought to open: the normalization of government ownership of private companies.

While the government has occasionally taken stakes in private companies, it has generally done so—rightly or wrongly—as a temporary measure to address a perceived emergency. However, never in U.S. history has the executive branch taken ownership stakes in private companies simply because the president wanted his own federal investment portfolio. And this administration has done so without clear legal authority.

As of this writing, the administration has announced deals giving the federal government equity stakes in 34 private companies and counting. Thus, after Trump has spent much of his second term acquiring the means of production, his pitch ahead of the November elections is that he will stop Democrats from … acquiring the means of production?

To be sure, there are anti-market Democrats who have long desired to make government ownership of companies a permanent federal policy tool. Indeed, how they have responded to the administration’s equity deals offers clues about how they may deploy this tool when Republican dominance in Washington ends.

Keep reading

The A.I. race is becoming a race for power

When Interior Secretary Doug Burgum toured LG’s manufacturing facility in Lansing, Michigan, last month, he wasn’t just checking in on an auto parts plant. He was carefully watching a plant originally built to make only electric vehicle batteries expand into battery production that can store power for the electric grid, a shift that could help America power the AI boom and compete with China.

Good. For years, Washington treated the electric grid like something that would simply keep working no matter how much we demanded of it. That era is over. Between the AI boom, a manufacturing renaissance, and a Pentagon that needs more power at more bases, the United States is in a race for electrons — one that China is hoping we lose. 

AI data centers require enormous amounts of reliable, around-the-clock electricity. Batteries can help bring that power online faster by relieving pressure on an already strained grid and getting more capacity out of the power plants and transmission infrastructure we already have.

The problem is that China currently controls roughly 80 percent of global battery cell manufacturing capacity and an even tighter grip on the materials batteries are made from. The CCP boasts nearly 70 percent of global critical mineral processing capacity overall, including the overwhelming majority of the world’s battery-grade graphite. 

Beijing has already shown it’s willing to use that leverage. In 2023, China imposed export licensing controls on key battery-grade graphite, citing “national security,” and graphite exports to the rest of the world collapsed by more than 90 percent in the following month. A domestic battery industry — cells, minerals, and storage systems alike — is the only real insurance against a supply chain that a strategic competitor can turn off at will, and the Trump administration knows it.

That’s why the U.S. made a point to install a record 18.9 gigawatts of battery storage in 2025, 52 percent more than the year before, and followed it with another record-breaking start to 2026, installing 3.3 GW in the first quarter alone — 54 percent above the previous Q1 record. 

Keep reading

Money allocated for home repairs instead went for a Lamborghini

Federal disaster money meant to rebuild homes destroyed by Hurricane Sandy instead helped finance a contractor’s Lamborghini, Porsche, Jaguar and real estate after he defrauded Long Island homeowners.

Alexander Almaraz, owner of the construction company Design Concepts Group, was sentenced last month to four years in federal prison after pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

Key facts: After Hurricane Sandy hit the East Coast in 2012, New York awarded $1.2 billion in federally-backed grants to help almost 13,000 families rebuild their homes. The funds came from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery Program.

Twenty homeowners hired Almaraz using $1.5 million in grant funding and $1 million from their personal savings. He was supposed to lift their houses onto temporary supports to replace their damaged foundations and then lower them back into place.

Almaraz admitted in court that he never intended to perform the work. He used the money to buy luxury cars, pay his credit card bills and purchase land in Missouri.

Almaraz also told the homeowners they could not live in their houses while he was supposedly working on them. Many moved into apartments Almaraz managed, and paid him rent.

Almaraz then moved to San Antonio without fixing the houses.

One homeowner told CBS New York that he paid Almaraz about $150,000 and was left with a home he could not live in. “The hurricane was terrible, but dealing with him was ten times worse,” he said.

The Department of Justice said it will determine how much restitution the victims will receive at a later date.

Keep reading

Zelensky Responds to Trump Calling for New President – Nearly Cries While Playing Victim and Demanding More US Support

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky ran to ABC for an interview on Sunday to respond to Trump’s fury toward him and whine about the United States not giving enough support for him to try and win the war. 

As The Gateway Pundit reported, Trump went off on Zelensky yesterday after announcing a deal with Russia to sell diesel to the US. While speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump blasted the Ukrainian President’s refusal to make peace and blamed him for the continuation of the war with Russia after Ukraine’s latest attack on a Russian oil export hub.

“I think it’s time for Ukraine to get a new president,” Trump said, blaming Zelensky for high oil and diesel prices.

Trump later doubled down last night, saying Zelensky “should have an election” and that “Putin would like to see a settlement strongly,” but “Zelensky does not want to make a deal.”

Zelensky on Sunday told ABC’s Jonathan Karl that it’s Russia’s fault that the war has continued, calling for a ceasefire. “Don’t attack us. Don’t kill our children. We will stop attacking your diesel. And I think it’s fair, fair deal,” he said. It should be noted that Zelensky turned down a US-backed ceasefire back in February 2025 when he and Trump had an explosive meeting in the Oval Office.

Zelensky further responded to Trump’s calls for an election and new president, claiming “it’s up to our people” to choose a leader as he continues to hold the country under martial law, barring an election.

Keep reading

Outrage over plan to livestream US military firing squad execution

The Pentagon’s plan to livestream the firing squad execution of a convicted military base mass shooter has met widespread condemnation, with the UN saying it would amount to torture and US lawmakers from both parties slamming the move.

Nidal Hasan’s execution – which is scheduled for December 3 at Fort Hood, Texas, where he gunned down 13 people in 2009 – is set to be the first by US military firing squad since 1945.

Representative Austin Scott, a member of US President Donald Trump’s Republican Party, said he supported executing Hasan but that “livestreaming executions is what jihadists do. America is better than that.”

Senator Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said broadcasting the execution would be “a barbaric spectacle” that would give Hasan “more attention and more control” and “a global platform to amplify his hateful, anti-American message”.

Reed added: “This is a gift to anti-American terrorist recruiters.”

Trump on Friday backed the execution – saying Hasan “deserves it” and branding him a “maniac” – but did not comment on the livestreaming.

A Pentagon official told AFP the previous day that the execution would be streamed live, after US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said “we’ll make sure that people are able to watch it, that it’s public”.

Later, Hegseth wrote “correct” when retweeting a media report about the planned livestream.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights condemned the move, telling AFP yesterday that “the livestreaming of an execution is tantamount to a public execution and would breach the absolute prohibition of torture”.

Archbishop Paul Coakley, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, said it was a “barbaric promotion of a culture of death and must be reconsidered”.

Hegseth said it would be the military’s first firing squad execution since World War II – a reference to Eddie Slovik, who was put to death for desertion in 1945.

Hegseth said: “People need to understand that … there’s serious consequence for these types of things.

“I kind of like the mentality we had in World War II, which was win, which was understand when the enemy attacks you, you need to stand your ground.”

The last US military execution was in 1961, when John Bennett was hanged for rape and attempted murder.

The Death Penalty Information Centre says that 135 soldiers have been executed by the US military since 1916.

According to rights group Amnesty International, at least 17 public executions are known to have been carried out in 2025 – six in Afghanistan and 11 in Iran.

Amnesty’s Justin Mazzola said on Friday that the death penalty is “a violation of human rights”, and that streaming Hasan’s execution “would only compound the cruelty”.

Twelve of the 13 people Hasan killed and 30 of those he wounded were soldiers. He was shot and partially paralysed by a civilian police officer who responded to the attack.

Keep reading

British Raven System Burned by Ukrainian Defector Intel

The British public is still being told that every new shipment of weapons to Kiev is a righteous investment in democracy. The reality on the ground in the Sumy direction is simpler and far uglier. A Raven air defence system, one of the specialised short-range launchers London rushed into service for Ukraine, has been destroyed by a Russian Lancet. The strike did not come from routine reconnaissance. It came from coordinates provided by a Ukrainian soldier who had had enough.

That soldier was not a high-ranking defector or a carefully cultivated agent. He was a man inside the system who decided the beatings, the corruption, and the forced service were no longer worth enduring. He contacted Russian intelligence, gave the precise location, and the Lancet did the rest. The Raven, estimated at six to eight million pounds, is gone. Each of its ASRAAM missiles costs roughly a quarter of a million pounds. British money, British engineering, British political capital — all of it converted into scrap by a single tip from the other side’s own ranks.

The Raven itself is a classic example of the improvised Western approach. Engineers took surplus ASRAAM missiles, mounted them on Supacat trucks using launch rails stripped from retired RAF aircraft, and shipped the result to Ukraine in record time. Thirteen systems were delivered. Official claims spoke of hundreds of engagements and high success rates against drones and cruise missiles. Those claims now sit alongside the wreckage near Sumy. Mobility and “shoot-and-scoot” tactics were supposed to keep these systems alive. They did not survive the moment a Ukrainian soldier decided his own command was the greater threat.

Keep reading

Outrage As Police ATTACK Teenage Girls

A video of South Yorkshire Police officers using aggressive force against a group of teenage girls on a Rotherham street has triggered widespread outrage. 

The footage shows shoves, a baton drawn and swung, girls knocked to the ground, a punch, and Tasers pointed at the group. 

What began as a dispersal order for breach of the peace escalated rapidly into scenes that many viewers describe as excessive and unnecessary.

The short clip, shared widely over the weekend, captures an officer telling the girls: “You are being dispersed for a breach of the peace.” Moments later, physical confrontations erupt. 

One officer shoves the girls forcefully. Another draws his baton and launches it toward the group. Two of the girls attempt to wrestle it away; one falls onto the road. 

A second officer punches a girl who had pushed him, sending her backward to the ground. Additional officers then arrive and point Tasers while ordering people back.

South Yorkshire Police issued a statement acknowledging the public reaction. “The short clip on social media of the police response to an incident in Rotherham over the weekend appears nothing short of shocking,” the force said. 

Their Professional Standards Department is reviewing all available footage, including body-worn video, from the full response to a 999 call. The assessment will determine next steps. The force added that officers are expected to act in a “lawful, proportionate, and fair” manner.

Keep reading