Ukraine Closes Week Of Record Drone Attacks On Russia By Hitting Important Weapons Plant

Ukraine announced Saturday that it used its Flamingo cruise missiles overnight to strike Russia’s Titan-Barrikady weapons plant, which reportedly manufactures parts for its powerful Oreshnik missile.

The military plant is in Volgograd, formerly Stalingrad, which is a major industrial city in southwest Russia. Writing on X, President Zelensky described it as a “major industrial complex” where Russia “produces artillery systems and specialized military equipment, including components for missile launch systems.”

“Every Russian defense facility involved in the war against Ukraine is a legitimate target for our long-range strikes,” he wrote.

The Associated Press reports, “Volgograd Gov. Andrei Bocharov confirmed an attack on a business in the region’s Krasnooktyabrsky district, saying 10 people had been wounded and taken to a hospital. He said production facilities at the site were damaged but did not identify the company.”

Additionally, “Ukraine’s state security service said Saturday morning that Ukrainian forces also struck an oil pumping facility in Russia’s Vladimir region that supplies fuel to Moscow, for the second time this month.”

But on the other side of the border, Ukrainian media reports that Russia was also busy with now nightly airstrikes:

Russian forces targeted production facilities belonging to the Naftogaz Group, Ukraine’s largest national oil and gas company, in the Poltava and Kharkiv regions.

The barrage of attacks included 129 drones, of which 113 were destroyed or jammed by Ukrainian forces, Ukrainian media reported.

The Russian overnight attacks on Ukraine killed two people and injuring more than 20, according to state officials.

At a moment much of the globe’s attention remains fixated on Iran and the fate of energy shipping through the largely blocked Strait of Hormuz, the Ukraine war is rapidly escalating.

Keep reading

How To Push Back Against The ‘Advancing Beast’ System

The big-picture lesson from the Covid era should have been obvious. It should have screamed loud and clear to every freedom-loving American: The power elites who run things at the local, state and federal levels want to tag and track our movement, but not just our movement. They want to track our diet, our healthcare, our purchasing habits, our use of energy, our online comment history, our very thoughts.

They want all of it. And if they get their way, you will own nothing. Literally nothing. Even if you technically own an asset, you will not control it, so do you really own it?

Your bank account will be theirs, programmed to be switched on or off at their pleasure, based on your compliance with the dictates of the surveillance state. Your car will be theirs, able to monitor your eye movements, your posture and who knows what else in real time, and be remotely disabled at their pleasure, thanks to Joe Biden’s remote vehicle kill switch law. Your ability to eat healthy food will be gone, thanks to Donald Trump’s granting of legal immunity to Bayer/Monsanto, protecting it from lawsuits based on the harmful effects of bioengineered food laced with chemicals. Same for your healthcare. Your online speech. Even your thoughts. They will own it all if they succeed in bringing in the long-planned AI-powered digital control grid that is currently under construction in the form of 6G wireless networks along with thousands of AI data centers, Flock cameras and other devices.

Flock Safety, the online security company based in Atlanta, has more than 89,000 vertically integrated and fully internet-connected cameras stationed in more than 5,000 communities nationwide and growing. The invasiveness of their cameras is also growing, with the ability to not only see but to hear everything going on for miles through its Raven Audio Detection Program. Flock is also now selling mobile cameras to law-enforcement agencies that will serve as “first responders” based on suspicious activity picked up under the company’s Falcon Drone Program.

Keep reading

China’s Expanding Biological Warfare Capabilities: Fueled by Military-Civil Fusion and AI

U.S. intelligence assessments warn that China is combining artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and military-civil fusion in ways that could significantly expand its biological warfare capabilities.

The United States government has long assessed that China operated an offensive biological weapons program from the early 1950s through at least the late 1980s. Two facilities in Beijing and Lingbao City, according to the State Department, weaponized ricin, botulinum toxin, anthrax, plague, cholera, and tularemia during that period. China acceded to the Biological Weapons Convention on November 15, 1984, which prohibits the development, production, and stockpiling of biological and toxin weapons.

Beijing has consistently maintained it has never possessed such weapons and is in full compliance. The State Department’s position, however, is that China likely continued operating an offensive program after signing the convention and that the earlier program was never verified as dismantled, a requirement the treaty imposes on all signatories. Beijing canceled a bilateral BWC-related meeting with Washington in early 2022 and has declined to provide the treaty’s required disclosures.

Keep reading

Georgia Urges AI Data Centers to Cut Water Usage as Droughts Rage

Georgia is reportedly struggling to meet the growing water demands of AI data centers, as Atlanta planners urge operators to prioritize community needs and reduce consumption — even as water usage varies widely across facilities.

“There’s no easy answer for how much water data centers are requesting,” Celine Benoit, principal planner for the Atlanta Regional Commission and Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District, said, according to a report by Bloomberg.

Benoit, who was speaking at a conference hosted by the American Water Works Association on Monday, added that Georgia residents are unfamiliar with AI data centers and oppose them based on the facilities’ water and energy demands.

Georgia, which is prone to droughts, is one of the areas of the U.S. where data centers are being quickly developed, with the Atlanta area being the second largest data center market in the Unites States as measured by megawatts of power usage.

Proposed AI data centers need water ranging anywhere from 5,000 gallons to 9 million gallons per day, depending on the cooling system, as well as other factors, Benoit noted.

As drought continues to lay waste to the state, local Georgia utilities have pushed back against data center developers’ requests for massive water usage, saying they simply don’t have enough supply to provide millions of gallons per day, she added.

Keep reading

Government’s latest attempt to censor online discourse is grave threat to free speech

The government’s latest censorship Bill C-34 is framed as legislation necessary to protect children. However, it incorporates some of the worst elements of Bill C-63 – the government’s previous “Online Harms Act” that failed to pass – and adds new censorship powers.

The bill proposes regulating social media, online services, and AI chatbots through the creation of a Digital Safety Commission. The Commission will have broad discretionary power to force compliance from online services and compel the removal of any harmful or “hateful” material.

Controversially, the bill weakens the legal definition of hatred presently used by the courts, reducing the requirement from both vilification and detestation to only one of either vilification OR detestation. The result will be increased censorship and a substantial chill on controversial speech.

Importantly, existing laws capture almost all of the conduct outlined in the bill. This includes cyberbullying and non-consensual distribution of intimate images, terroristic or violent threats, hate speech under the Criminal Code, counselling self-harm (Criminal Code s.241), and possession and distribution of CSAM material.

The bill requires online service providers to create an age verification system. Though the bill doesn’t specify age verification methods, it will undoubtedly require service providers to collect biometric and/or behavioural information from both adults and children, engaging privacy rights and raising fears of security breaches. The effect will be to create a database of personal identifying information and to destroy online anonymity 

Digital services that fail to comply with directives of the Digital Safety Commission will face substantial fines based on a percentage of global revenue.

“Laws protecting children from online harm and abuse are vital. However, for the most part, they already exist. All digital services like YouTube, X, Facebook, and TikTok have reporting and takedown policies and mechanisms for illegal or egregiously harmful material. Criminal charges for hateful or threatening posts are already commonplace. Of course, laws should be enacted to address any gaps, but online age verification for children will require age verification for everyone. So while the government frames the bill as a law to protect children, its effect will be to control digital access, comprehensively surveil and punish adults for online dissent. Together with Bill C-22, it establishes an online surveillance architecture that will negatively impact every Canadian’s right to free expression. Parliament should pursue targeted child-protection measures without undermining privacy, anonymity, and freedom of expression.”

Keep reading

“Unlike Anything I’ve Seen In 40 Years”: Explosion In Data-Centers And Memory Costs Fueling Third Inflation Wave

We’re finally starting to see hints of relief when it comes to inflation. Prices at the pump are starting to come down, monthly core CPI momentum has slowed, used cars were down around 2% YoY, and food inflation is starting to moderate. On the other hand, there’s America’s massive explosion in artificial-intelligence infrastructure – which is beginning to push prices up on everything from electricity to smartphones.

On Thursday Apple announced a 15-25% price hike on Mac computers and iPads, after CEO Tim Cook told the Wall Street Journal that the jump in costs was “unlike anything he had seen in any area in over 40 years.” An Apple spokesperson placed the blame on the “rapid expansion of AI data centers, which has created an extraordinary surge in demand for memory and storage,” causing component prices to surge.

As the Wall Street Journal notes; 

The money pouring into the AI arms race is unprecedented. Analysts peg capital spending at five of the so-called hyperscalers—Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms, Microsoft and Oracle—at $741 billion this year, according to FactSet, up nearly 75% from last year.

Where is all that money going? While much of the conversation is focused on what AI can do, the build-out itself is strikingly physical, said Columbia University economist Stijn Van Nieuwerburgh. -WSJ

AI data centers require specific, sophisticated equipment to ensure cool, stable operation – as well as electric and fiber-optic cables and backup generators in order to keep them running 24-7. According to the report, Van Nieuwerburgh estimates that the AI buildout could cost somewhere in the range of $8 trillion over the next six years. As such, the demand for components shared throughout the economy (memory, for example), the effects are now trickling down to consumer electronics – like iPads. Other companies such as Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony have all raised prices on devices.

Keep reading

Ford Hires Back Former Engineers to Fix Errors Caused by AI

Ford is acknowledging the challenges it faced with AI production and design systems after the automaker recently claimed the top spot in JD Power’s initial quality ranking for mainstream brands for the first time in 16 years. According to Ford, attempting to replace highly-skilled employees with AI-powered systems was a mistake.

The Verge reports that Ford has revealed that its reliance on artificial intelligence and automated systems in vehicle production and design created significant quality problems, forcing the company to bring back experienced engineers and technicians to correct mistakes made by its robots.

Charles Poon, Ford’s vice president of vehicle hardware engineering, explained during a briefing with reporters this week that the automaker believed simply introducing AI and adjusting existing design requirements would automatically yield high-quality vehicles. “Mistakenly, we thought that by just introducing artificial intelligence and adjusting the design requirements that we had, that that would produce a high-quality product,” Poon said.

The problem was compounded when some of Ford’s most experienced personnel departed before their accumulated institutional knowledge could be fully captured by the company’s automated systems. This loss of expertise proved particularly damaging because the effectiveness of AI depends entirely on the quality of data used to train the models. Ford had underestimated the value of veteran engineers who had worked through multiple vehicle-development cycles and possessed deep understanding of potential problems that could emerge during production.

To address this gap, Ford hired, promoted, or brought back more than 350 experienced engineers to rebuild its technical expertise base. These seasoned professionals were tasked with retraining the automated systems and mentoring younger engineers who were struggling to maintain vehicle quality standards. “That’s where some of our most experienced engineers have had experience solving and identifying those problems before they creep into the system,” Poon said.

Ford’s quality challenges have been well documented in recent years. The automaker currently leads the industry in number of recalls, with quality ratings declining over several years. Difficulties intensified during launches of the Explorer and Aviator models, supply-chain disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic, and a growing number of vehicle recalls that damaged consumer confidence.

Keep reading

UNPRECEDENTED: EU Parliament President Roberta Metsola Pushing Controversial Scanning of Online Content, Ignoring That EMPs Have Already Rejected the Idea Multiple Times

Another EU tyrant on the move.

Leave it to the EU to have a dizzying number of ‘chiefs’, signaling a bloated bureaucracy that has become more of a problem than a solution for the issues that European nations face.

Fasten up for the list: the European Commissioner (currently Ursula von der Leyen/VDL): a ‘member of the European Commission’s College responsible for overseeing one specific policy area (portfolio), such as trade, climate, or digital affairs.’

The President of the European Council (currently Antonio Costa): ‘Chairs summits of EU heads of state and government, drives consensus on the EU’s overall political direction and priorities, and ensures the EU’s external representation at that level’.

High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (currently Kaja Kallas): ‘Leads and coordinates the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), chairs the Foreign Affairs Council, represents the EU on the world stage as its chief diplomat, and serves as a Vice-President of the European Commission’.

Hold on, that’s not all. President of the European Parliament (currently Roberta Metsola): ‘Chairs plenary sessions and key internal bodies, oversees the Parliament’s work and rules, signs adopted legislation, and represents the Parliament to other EU institutions and externally’.

Keep reading

Maryland Protests Data Center Costs

A group of 80 Maryland state lawmakers are backing a complaint at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission over the PJM Interconnection’s cost allocation for transmission lines that support data centers.

Driven by the way PJM spreads transmission costs, Maryland ratepayers will pay $1.6 billion over the next decade for transmission projects that were approved in the grid operator’s last three regional transmission expansion plans that are designed to mainly serve out-of-state data centers, Maryland’s ratepayer advocate — the Office of People’s Counsel — said in its May 7 complaint.

“While PJM’s rules are unfair for many PJM states, they impact Maryland disproportionately simply because Maryland sits next to Data Center Alley in Virginia,” the Maryland lawmakers said in a Wednesday filing at FERC. “Given the projections of massive data center growth — more than 80,000 megawatts over the next 20 years — PJM is likely to bill Maryland customers billions more for future data center-driven transmission costs.”

The complaint at FERC comes amid an intense focus across the United States on how data centers can affect the electric bills of existing ratepayers through increased generation and transmission costs. The complaint centers on the transmission side of the equation. It contends that FERC is barred from approving transmission cost allocation methodologies that assign costs to ratepayers that won’t gain “roughly commensurate” benefits.

PJM’s cost allocation methodology assigns half of certain regional transmission projects based on a load-ratio share across its footprint, which assumes that all transmission built will benefit the entire grid, according to the ratepayer advocate’s complaint. The other half of transmission costs are assigned via a “solution-based distribution factor analysis,” which fails to capture certain reliability issues caused by data centers, the ratepayer advocate said.

Spreading data center-driven transmission costs across PJM’s footprint could lead to overbuilding, according to the complaint.

“By socializing data center-driven transmission costs to all ratepayers, it insulates states and utilities that attract speculative load growth from overbuilding and stranded asset risk while shifting those risks to neighboring states’ ratepayers,” the ratepayer advocate said.

Further, state-level large-load tariffs fail to address, and may make worse, the misallocation of transmission costs caused by PJM’s transmission cost allocation methodology, according to the complaint. 

Also, recent FERC-approved utility “transmission security agreements” between utilities and data centers are “often confidential, highly variable, and fail to protect existing customers,” the ratepayer advocate said.

The agreements leave ratepayers exposed to transmission costs caused by data centers, according to the ratepayer advocate. “Moreover, they carry potential legal consequences that may prove difficult to unravel,” the ratepayer advocate said. The ratepayer advocate said FERC should order PJM to revise its cost allocation methodology so that data centers pay for the transmission projects that they cause.

As a start, PJM should be required to assign the costs of transmission projects that are designed to serve data centers and other large loads to the grid operator’s zones where the data centers are located, according to the complaint. That would allow state-level large load tariffs to address those transmission costs, the ratepayer advocate said.

“The upstream leakage of a substantial portion of data center driven costs at the regional level to other zones through the current operation of the PJM tariff creates an unjust subsidy for that data center load,” the ratepayer advocate said.

The complaint calls on FERC to order PJM to re-study the baseline reliability projects approved in its last three regional transmission expansion plans to determine the costs caused by forecast load growth from data centers. 

FERC has extended the comment deadline on the complaint to July 27.

Keep reading

AMD silently removes memory encryption from consumer Ryzen CPUs

According to a report by Ars Technica, AMD has quietly stripped a critical security feature from its lower-end CPUs, leaving unaware users potentially vulnerable to physical attacks. Following a months-long investigation tracked on GitHub, Ben Kilpatrick confirmed that the Transparent Secure Memory Encryption (TSME) feature — which protects CPUs against physical exploits that siphon data from connected memory chips — was suddenly no longer available on AMD CPUs outside the company’s Pro lineup.

As the exhaustive inquiry, which involved conversations with AMD engineers, board vendors, and other CPU users, was coming to a head, an AMD engineer abruptly cut discussions short, stating, “My apologies, but I don’t have any more information to share on this topic.” As of this report, AMD has neither officially acknowledged nor explained the disappearance of the security feature.

TSME is a protection feature that encrypts the data stored in memory, making it unusable to physical attackers. AMD initially added this feature to its high-end CPUs, then later extended it to lower-end CPUs. Eventually, the feature became a given, leaving lower-end chip users assured in its availability as part of the chip package. However, without prior notice, AMD appears to have scrapped the security feature in these processors.

According to the Ars report, the company’s only official reaction to the matter — not counting the GitHub discussions — is an email response stating that TSME “is a security feature only applied to PRO CPUs as part of AMD PRO Technologies,” notably the first time the company has publicly stated such a restriction, despite the feature having worked on consumer chips for years. However, it remains unclear whether the disappearance is an intentional policy decision by AMD to reserve TSME for Pro chips or an unintentional regression that was introduced in AGESA 1.2.7.0, a newer firmware release.

Another concerning aspect of the removal is that the feature’s disappearance is completely undetectable on Windows machines and requires significant technical work to identify on Linux. That means the security feature was removed, leaving users unaware that anything had changed.

Kilpatrick, a self-described “privacy-conscious Linux hobbyist” who first reported the change, was installing a new operating system on his machine running a Ryzen 7 9700X from the Zen 5 architecture. To confirm that all his security protections were enabled, he ran Host Security ID (HSI), an auditing feature that evaluates a system’s firmware and hardware security configurations. To his surprise, HSI reported that TSME was no longer supported — even though he had enabled it in his BIOS settings all along. The contradiction sent him searching for answers.

Keep reading