Pokémon Go — The Largest Mapped Data Collection Ploy in History

When Pokémon Go was released, it appeared to be a harmless game encouraging people to go outside and explore, yet beneath that surface was a far more sophisticated system that directed human movement into very specific locations where data was needed most, turning millions of users into mobile data collectors. The placement of Pokémon, Gyms, and PokéStops was not random, but concentrated around landmarks, businesses, and dense urban corridors, meaning players were repeatedly funneled into high-value mapping zones, often returning to the same locations over and over again, capturing them from multiple angles, at different times of day, and under varying conditions, which is exactly how high-quality spatial datasets are built.

For many reading this, particularly those who never played the game, it is important to understand what this actually looked like in practice, because this was not some passive background process, it required people to physically walk through neighborhoods, parks, shopping districts, and even residential areas while holding up their phones, actively scanning their surroundings to “catch” virtual creatures that did not exist. The game encouraged users to point their cameras at real-world objects, move around them, and interact with the environment. The system was capturing detailed imagery not just of public landmarks but also of surrounding areas, including streets, entryways, and private homes, all embedded in what appeared to be a simple entertainment experience.

Keep reading

US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

A bill introduced by Representative Josh Gottheimer in the House on April 13 would require Apple, Google, and every other operating system vendor to verify the age of anyone setting up a new device in the United States.

The legislation, H.R. 8250, travels under the friendlier name of the Parents Decide Act, and it is among the most aggressive surveillance mandates ever proposed for American consumer technology.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

The press releases describing it lead with children. The text describes something much larger. To confirm a child is under 18, the system has to identify everyone else, too, and the bill builds the infrastructure to do exactly that.

This is child safety as a delivery mechanism for mass identification. The pattern is familiar by now. A genuine harm gets named, a sympathetic victim gets centered, and the solution proposed reshapes the digital lives of three hundred million people who were not the problem.

The Parents Decide Act follows that template with unusual precision. It takes the real suffering of real children and uses it to justify building a national identity layer underneath every device sold in the country, administered by two private companies, with the details to be filled in later.

The mandate sits in Section 2(a)(1), which obligates providers to “Require any user of the operating system to provide the date of birth of the user” both to set up an account and to use the device at all. Adults included.

There is no carve-out for grown users, no opt-out for people who simply want to turn on a phone without handing a date of birth to Apple or Google first.

The age check is the entry fee for owning a computer. What happens to that data afterward gets handed off to the Federal Trade Commission to sort out later. A federal bill that mandates identification as a condition of using a general-purpose computing device represents something the United States has not previously had, which is a national ID requirement for turning on a device.

Gottheimer framed the proposal at a Ridgewood news conference on April 2, standing outside the local YMCA with a coalition of allies. “With each passing day, the internet is becoming more and more treacherous for our kids. We’re not just talking about social media anymore — we’re talking about artificial intelligence and platforms that are shaping how our kids think, feel, and act, often without any real guardrails,” he said.

His diagnosis of the current system is accurate enough. “Children are able to bypass age requirements by entering a different birthday and accessing apps without any real verification. Kids can bypass age requirements by simply typing in a different birthday. That’s it. That’s the system,” he said.

Keep reading

DOJ Refuses Cooperation, Warns France to Back Off Censorship Probe Targeting X Platform

The U.S. Justice Department has flatly refused to help French authorities investigate Elon Musk’s social media platform X.

In a letter sent Friday obtained by The Wall Street Journal , the DOJ’s Office of International Affairs said the French probe is an attempt to regulate a U.S. company through criminal law.

“This investigation seeks to use the criminal legal system in France to regulate a public square for the free expression of ideas and opinions in a manner contrary to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution,” the letter states.

The department added that France’s requests “constitute an effort to entangle the United States in a politically charged criminal proceeding aimed at wrongfully regulating through prosecution the business activities of a social media platform.”

Keep reading

Two US citizens get combined 16 years in prison for running North Korean laptop farms — fake remote IT work scheme netted DPRK $5 million in around three years

Two individuals from New Jersey pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering after their arrest in June 2025 for running laptop farms that allowed North Korean IT workers to pose as American residents and work at U.S. companies. According to the Department of Justice, the two individuals, Kejia Wang and Zhenxing Wang, were sentenced to 9 years and 7 years and 8 months of prison time, respectively, plus another three years of supervised release. Furthermore, they are required to forfeit a total of $600,000 that they were paid for during their service to North Korea, more formally known as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK).

“For years, the defendants enriched themselves by assisting North Korean actors in a fraudulent scheme to gain employment with U.S. companies,” Assistant Attorney General for National Security John A. Eisenberg said in the statement. “The ruse placed North Korean IT workers on the payrolls of unwitting U.S. companies and in U.S. computer systems, thereby harming our national security. NSD will hold accountable those who facilitate North Korea’s illicit revenue generation efforts.”

Records reveal that the two defendants, plus several other co-conspirators, stole the identities of over 80 U.S. persons and used them to illicitly gain positions in over 100 U.S. companies, including several that are listed in the Fortune 500. This resulted in massive expenses for the affected businesses, where they collectively had to spend over $3 million on legal fees, computer network remediation costs, and other damages.

Keep reading

New German search engine lets people check whether their relatives were Nazis

A new search engine that allows users to search Nazi party records in order to find out whether their ancestors were card-carrying members has been accessed millions of times since it was launched earlier this month.

The huge database has been made available by the German newspaper Die Zeit in a bid to “end the silence born of misplaced shame,” according to an editorial from the publication. It is run in conjunction with archives in Germany and the United States.

Founded after World War I, Hitler’s party did not really gain in popularity until the economic collapse of the Great Depression. There was a sharp rise in support for it during the 1930 elections, and when Hitler was elected three years later he abolished all other parties, creating a mass movement that controlled all aspects of German life.

By the late 1930s, the “vast majority of Germans supported Hitler and the Nazi state,” according to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

According to Die Zeit, 10.2 million Germans joined the party in the 20 years from 1925 and at its height at the end of World War II it had about 9 million members.

In the final days of the war, the Nazis sought to destroy the party’s vast collection of membership cards but they were saved at the last minute and later handed to the Americans. They were then stored in the Berlin Document Center but were later transferred to the German Federal Archives, with copies also at the US National Archives, the newspaper reported.

Keep reading

US Bill Mandates On-Device Age Verification

A bill introduced by Representative Josh Gottheimer in the House on April 13 would require Apple, Google, and every other operating system vendor to verify the age of anyone setting up a new device in the United States.

The legislation, H.R. 8250, travels under the friendlier name of the Parents Decide Act, and it is among the most aggressive surveillance mandates ever proposed for American consumer technology.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

The press releases describing it lead with children. The text describes something much larger. To confirm a child is under 18, the system has to identify everyone else, too, and the bill builds the infrastructure to do exactly that.

This is child safety as a delivery mechanism for mass identification. The pattern is familiar by now. A genuine harm gets named, a sympathetic victim gets centered, and the solution proposed reshapes the digital lives of three hundred million people who were not the problem.

The Parents Decide Act follows that template with unusual precision. It takes the real suffering of real children and uses it to justify building a national identity layer underneath every device sold in the country, administered by two private companies, with the details to be filled in later.

The mandate sits in Section 2(a)(1), which obligates providers to “Require any user of the operating system to provide the date of birth of the user” both to set up an account and to use the device at all. Adults included.

There is no carve-out for grown users, no opt-out for people who simply want to turn on a phone without handing a date of birth to Apple or Google first.

The age check is the entry fee for owning a computer. What happens to that data afterward gets handed off to the Federal Trade Commission to sort out later. A federal bill that mandates identification as a condition of using a general-purpose computing device represents something the United States has not previously had, which is a national ID requirement for turning on a device.

Keep reading

FBI Recovers Deleted Signal Messages Through iPhone Notifications

The FBI successfully recovered private Signal messages from a defendant’s iPhone even after the app was deleted. Learn how this security loophole works and the simple setting you must change today to keep your chats private.

Most of us prefer using the Signal app because it is supposed to be very secure with a remarkable end-to-end encryption system that hides our chats from everyone else. It also has a message-disappearing feature to help us set a message deletion time.

But the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) found a way to read private Signal messages on an iPhone, even after the app was deleted. This was revealed in a court case in Texas that these messages can stay hidden in the phone’s memory longer than we expected.

How the loophole works

The case involves a woman named Lynette Sharp and an attack on a Texas detention centre in July 2025. During the trial in April 2026, the FBI revealed they recovered her messages even when she had deleted the Signal app. The bureau, reportedly, retrieved the messages from the iPhone’s push notification database.

During the trial, FBI Special Agent Clark Wiethorn explained how investigators accessed the evidence. When a message arrives, the phone shows a little preview on the screen, which is handled by the phone’s operating system and not the Signal app.

Even if Signal deletes the message later, the phone’s system can save a copy of that preview in its own records. To read these saved messages from Signal, the FBI used Cellebrite, a forensic tool often used by law enforcement to scan seized devices.

A key finding is that the FBI could only see incoming messages, not the ones Sharp sent, which confirms the data came from the notification storage. It shows that while the app’s encryption is strong, the phone’s operating system keeps its own logs of everything.

Keep reading

UK Southport Inquiry Pushes Mass Surveillance and VPN Restrictions

On July 29 2024, a teenager walked into a children’s Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport, England, and murdered three young girls with a knife. He injured ten others.

It was, by any measure, one of the most horrifying attacks on British soil in recent memory, and what followed should have been a reckoning with the catastrophic state failures that let it happen.

Instead, the British government looked at the smoldering aftermath and decided the real enemy was the internet, and the solution just so happens to be the mass surveillance censorship proposals the government is already working on.

After the attack, outrage on social media turned to protests. Protests became riots. And the state’s response landed with a speed and ferocity that it had never managed to direct at, say, the agencies that let a known danger walk free for years.

A former childcarer named Lucy Connolly was jailed for 31 months for a single post on X. That is three months longer than the sentence given to a man who physically attacked a mosque during the same period of unrest.

The UK was already a country where arrests for “offensive” social media posts had nearly doubled in seven years, climbing from 5,502 in 2017 to 12,183 in 2023. The overall conviction rate for those arrests was falling at the same time. Police were locking people up for what they typed at a rate that was going up, while the number of convictions that actually stuck was going down.

The Southport riots became the accelerant. A House of Commons Home Affairs Committee report used the unrest to call for a “new national system for policing” with enhanced capabilities to surveil social media activity, framing public anger as a problem of online “misinformation” rather than a consequence of the state’s own failures.

The state was dodging accountability by demanding censorship and surveillance and blaming the internet for unrest.

Keep reading

Report: 60% of Australian Teens Are Evading Social Media Ban

The Molly Rose Foundation (MRF), a British-based group that generally favors online safety measures for children, published research on Monday that found about 60% of Australian teenagers are evading their country’s landmark ban on social media accounts for children under 16.

MRF’s report was entitled “Australia’s Social Media Ban – Is It Working?” The report concluded it wasn’t, not really, although the ban has significantly impacted the online activity of Australian youth.

“There are significant questions about the effectiveness of Australia’s social media ban. Three fifths (61%) of 12–15 year-olds who previously held accounts on restricted platforms continue to have access to one or more active accounts,” the report noted.

MRF found that over half of the 12 to 15-year-olds who used the most perilous of the social media platforms, including TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram, were still able to access those services. 

Seventy percent of children who responded to the survey, which was conducted in partnership with Australia’s largest online youth panel YouthInsight, said it was “easy” to avoid the social media ban. Fifty-one percent of respondents said the ban made no difference to their online safety, and 14% said they felt less safe after the ban was imposed. 

“This may reflect a range of factors, including their displacement to smaller or more poorly moderated platforms, their experiences on sites not covered by the ban, or a perception that online platforms have pivoted from safety towards prioritizing access restrictions,” the report’s authors ventured.

The ban does seem to have reduced the amount of time children spend online overall, which will likely be taken as a positive development by child safety advocates.

MRF suggested some of the blame for the questionable effectiveness of the ban lies with social media companies, which do not appear to making very aggressive efforts to detect or deactivate accounts created by under-16 users, after headlines were made by a large number of account deactivations in the early months of the ban.

On the other hand, about 5% of the children who evaded the ban were using virtual private networks (VPNs), a tool that has been successfully employed around the world to mask user identities and evade digital censorship. VPNs are a very effective tool for masking user identity, which is why censorious governments are looking for ways to ban them.

MRF noted in passing that one of the earliest government efforts to ban children from online platforms was undertaken by South Korea, which prohibited online gaming for children from midnight to 6:00 a.m., beginning in 2011. The ban “initially resulted in a reduction of time spent online,” but those improvements faded over time, and in fact Internet use by children wound up increasing. The South Korean government eventually discontinued the ban.

MRF felt its report directly contradicted claims by the Australian government that its ban on social media for teens has been “very successful in its early days,” and this could have implications for other countries thinking about bans of their own, including the United Kingdom.

Keep reading

How UK Regulator Ofcom Quietly Bypassed International Law to Police American Speech

A Freedom of Information response has confirmed what the UK’s speech regulator would probably have preferred to keep quiet. Ofcom fired off 197 information demands to American tech companies under the Online Safety Act, and not a single one went through the US-UK Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty, the formal diplomatic process that exists for exactly this kind of cross-border legal enforcement. Every one of those 197 notices was sent directly, by email or post, to companies operating entirely on American soil.

The number comes from a FOI request filed by Daniel Lü, who asked Ofcom a series of pointed questions about how it enforces the Online Safety Act against non-UK targets.

Ofcom confirmed that as of February 26, 2026, it had issued 197 Section 100 notices to US businesses. Zero through MLAT. The treaty between the US and UK that governs how one country’s legal process gets enforced in the other’s jurisdiction was treated as optional. Ofcom decided it didn’t apply.

That admission drew an immediate response from Preston Byrne, the American lawyer who represents 4chan and other US companies targeted by Ofcom.

Byrne called the 197 notices a “breathtaking” “attack on the First Amendment” and pointed out the uncomfortable math.

Only two US companies, 4chan and Kiwi Farms, have publicly refused to comply with Ofcom’s demands. If Byrne’s assessment is right, that leaves Ofcom enjoying “a 98% compliance rate with foreign censorship orders that violate the First Amendment.”

A British regulator sent nearly 200 demands to American companies, bypassed every established legal channel, and almost all of them appear to have simply done what they were told. The chilling effect is already here.

Keep reading