Avert your eyes! My Sunday morning look at incompetency, corruption and policy failures:

• ‘A Deal Written in Pencil’: Tariffs Are Erasing America’s Credibility: David Hebert on the lesson Mark Carney says Canada drew from 18 months of dealing with Washington, after the US slapped a 50% tariff on $20 billion of Canadian goods. (The Daily Economy)) see also Wiped Out: US Faces Surging Toilet Paper Prices amid Trade War with Canada: Lauren Aratani on Carney’s vow to match US tariffs “dollar for dollar.” (The Guardian)

• The Government Report That Made Me Stop Trusting Our Statistical Agencies: Jared Bernstein has spent years waving people off this degree of mistrust. He writes that he no longer can. (Jared Bernstein)

• Bitcoin Treasury Companies Shed $80bn in Value as Business Model Unwinds: Nikou Asgari on an FT analysis of the 50 largest corporate bitcoin holders — combined market cap down from $150bn in July 2025 to $67bn today.(Financial Times) see also Bitcoin Is Great (For Systemic Theft of Aid Money): Robin Wigglesworth on a new NBER paper that uses on-chain data to trace exactly where the money went. Jamie Dimon’s acerbic list of bitcoin’s use cases holds up better than its defenders would like. (Financial Times)

• Logging In Was Never Supposed to Be This Complicated: Will Oremus on password managers, passkeys, and the tyranny of the two-factor-authentication code. (The Atlantic)

• The Teaser Period: Why the AI Boom Is Built to Break: Groundbreaker rewinds to summer 2006, when prices had risen for a decade, delinquencies were near record lows, spreads were tight, and the securitization machine hummed. Ask a trading desk then whether the mortgage market was months from seizing and most would have laughed. Trillions in compute commitments come due in 2027–2028. The hidden mechanics reveal how the AI boom breaks, and when. (Groundbreaker) see also Wiggleswroth: This Is How the A.I. Debt Binge Sinks the Economy: In other words, if 2025’s A.I. frenzy was merely bonkers, we are now entering the territory of bonkers squared — or perhaps even bonkers cubed. Robin Wigglesworth on the hyperscalers’ borrowing spree — if 2025’s AI frenzy was merely bonkers, we are now entering the territory of bonkers squared, or perhaps bonkers cubed. (New York Times)

• A State Gave Sheriffs 20% of Its Opioid Settlement Cash. We Followed the Money: Aneri Pattani on Louisiana sheriffs spending millions in settlement funds on law enforcement gear rather than treatmentt (Stat)

• They Dedicated Their Lives to Teaching. Then the Deepfakes Started: Caroline Haskins on teachers like Luis DeSantiago, whose likeness turned up in AI-generated photos circulating among students on social media. The deepfake epidemic in schools is affecting more than students. Four teachers tell WIRED about becoming targets of sexualized, AI-generated content—and how difficult it was to find accountability. (Wired)

• America Has 3 Billion Words of Legal Code Riddled With ‘Policy Sludge’: Outdated rules are gumming up governments across the country. Daniel E. Ho of Stanford: the Fed still sends Congress an annual report on the Presidential $1 Coin Program, years after the coins stopped being minted for circulation. Federal law demands it. (Washington Post)

• Josh Shapiro is battling RFK Jr. over measles, and the politics are getting messy: Rachel Roubein on the heated call between the Pennsylvania governor and the health secretary, minutes before Shapiro announced two measles-related deaths. A feud between the Pennsylvania governor and health secretary sparked by this week’s reports of measles-related deaths laid bare the increasingly polarized politics of public health. (Washington Post) see also RFK Jr Lied in Senate Confirmation Hearings, Newly Revealed Documents Indicate: Michelle R. Smith on letters obtained by the Guardian and AP contradicting the health secretary’s sworn testimony that his 2019 Samoa visit had “nothing to do with vaccines.”Letters obtained by Guardian and AP contradict testimony that 2019 visit to Samoa had ‘nothing to do with vaccines’ (The Guardian)

• Dolphins and other lovers: The Andoque of the Amazon know what we have forgotten: the forest’s most beautiful creatures are also its most dangerous (Aeon)

Video of the day: Your Reality Is a Simulation

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business with David Booth, Founder, Chairman, and former CEO of Dimensional Funds Advisors. DFA just crossed $1 trillion dollars, and has become the largest active equity ETF manager. Booth’s new book is “Stay Calm: Learn to Embrace Uncertainty in Investing and Life.”

One of two measles-related deaths of unvaccinated people in Pennsylvania was an infant

Source: CNN

Sign up for our reads-only mailing list here.

~~~

To learn how these reads are assembled each day, please see this.

 

The post 10 Sunday Reads appeared first on The Big Picture.

'Chexit': Global Asset Managers Are Fleeing China

Authored by Anders Corr via The Epoch Times,

Fidelity International (FIL) is reportedly the latest fund manager to plan a pullout from its China fund. FIL launched a wholly-owned subsidiary in Shanghai three years ago, but a lack of demand from retail investors led to disappointing growth.

Reuters first reported the story. According to its sources, "A combination of fierce local competition, frequent leadership turnover and chronic struggles to build scale ultimately convinced global FIL executives that the China retail venture was untenable."

FIL has $1.18 trillion in assets under management (AUM). It started its China fund in 2023. The next year, Reuters saw an internal FIL document that said it needed more than $14 billion in assets to become profitable. After several years, it had reportedly reached only about $670 million (less than 5 percent of the goal) and began planning an exit.

Fidelity follows multiple other global asset managers that are backing away from China amid domestic competition and geopolitical tensions. These include Schroders, Legal & General, and Vanguard. The companies that left China were in stiff competition with domestic funds and Western China funds that had typically first been established through joint ventures (JVs) with Chinese institutions.

In 2019, Beijing invited global fund managers, for the first time, to establish wholly-owned China funds. The regime framed the invitation as part of a trade agreement, and the latter sought access to the Chinese public's $12.8 trillion in investable assets. For some of the international investors, it did not end well.

In 2020 and 2021, respectively, the Chinese regime issued permits to BlackRock and Neuberger Berman to start such funds. They both had ties to the regime and headquarters in Shanghai. In 2021, BlackRock raised $1 billion for its fund in its first week, which impressed other institutional investors. It was the first mutual fund owned by foreigners to be granted permission to sell directly to Chinese customers, and it did very well, at least at first.

Several other large asset managers converted their JVs into wholly-owned funds by buying out their JV partners. These then became the largest and most successful wholly foreign-owned public fund houses in China.

Some institutions, including Fidelity, Schroders, and BlackRock, launched greenfield, wholly-owned China funds, but they tended to be smaller than the converted JVs, delivered lower returns, and were disappointing in terms of growth. In 2018, Vanguard's Asia CEO mentioned a possible future China AUM of $5 trillion. But Vanguard was the first to close its Shanghai office in 2023.

The next year, Legal & General canceled plans to get a China business license and reduced its presence in Shanghai by about 80 percent.

Schroders, a British firm with AUM of $1.1 trillion, established a wholly-owned China fund management unit in 2023. But three years later, Schroders only managed $250 million. In May, news broke that the company planned to sell its China funds to a wholly-owned China unit of Neuberger Berman.

China has a $5.9 trillion public fund market dominated by domestic fund managers. Even as the smaller foreign-owned funds cut their losses in China, the larger ones are holding on.

JP Morgan Asset Management China is the largest foreign-owned fund with $34 billion in AUM. Manulife China has $17 billion, and Morgan Stanley China has $4.5 billion. These three funds started as joint ventures and then bought out their Chinese partners. Their returns tend to be better than those of new ventures, with about a third of their funds getting above 10 percent.

Most new foreign-owned funds posted a year-to-date return of less than 5 percent in June, which is far below the returns of the leading domestic fund managers. The top 11 Chinese companies each have more than $147 billion in AUM. Yicai has noted that the best 15 domestic funds had returns of at least 90 percent, which likely attracted some retail investors.

Domestic funds reportedly have multiple advantages over western funds, including brand recognition, established online and bank distribution channels, and low-overhead index and money-market businesses dominated by locals.

According to a Yicai Global source, "Most domestic fund managers have spent decades building out full product lines, gaining deep experience, earning a track record investors recognize, building local sales networks, and learning Chinese investors' preferences."

Other Yicai sources note that to compete, foreign companies should localize their management, research, investment, and sales teams.

There may be other advantages less frequently noted. A Fitch Ratings analyst put it bluntly when discussing the entrance of foreign banks into China's retail banking space in 2007.

"Foreign banks don't break people's arms when they don't repay them, like some Chinese banks might," the analyst said. "They can't operate like that, so what they have to focus on is the high end of the retail market."

Another challenge is unspoken regime bias against foreign companies, combined with overregulation. In June, for example, China's top securities regulator targeted algorithmic trading, which is one of the West's bright spots, not only internationally but in China trading.

The measures hit domestic algo traders as well, but they block one avenue in which foreign firms hold an advantage. Regular domestic managers have closer ties to regime agencies and exchange relationships and, therefore, better access to market data and regulatory largesse.

This isn't the first time that foreign banks have been squeezed in China to the advantage of domestic actors. The British pioneered modern banking in Shanghai in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Banks from other countries, including Germany, France, Japan, and the United States, entered later.

But after the revolution of 1949, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) took over the most lucrative businesses of the banks and forced them to maintain idle workers. This forced most of them out in the 1950s. The two major foreign banks that remained, Standard Chartered (under a prior name) and HSBC, lost market share. Starting in 1979, the CCP gradually reopened its financial sector to foreign entities while ensuring that its domestic banks remained dominant.

With an uneven playing field and unfair referees, China is not the best of opportunities for Western investors. In the case of companies like Fidelity, Schroders, Vanguard, and Legal & General, the numbers did not add up and probably never will.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 23:20

AI Skepticism Outweighs Excitement In The US

Despite the tech industry’s conviction that the rise of AI is an inflection point that will change the course of humanity, many humans remain skeptical whether the new direction we’re headed in is the right one.

As Statista's Felix Richter reports below, the pace at which AI seems to be taking over parts of our lives, whether we like it or not, is especially worrisome to many.

In a recent Statista Consumer Insights survey, 31 percent of U.S. respondents said that they were worried about the speed at which AI is developing and 25 percent of respondents claimed to be avoiding AI wherever they can.

18 percent said they used AI but felt bad about it and another 28 percent simply don’t believe in the hype, saying they weren’t convinced that AI is as good as people say.

You will find more infographics at Statista

At the other end of the spectrum, 28 percent of respondents said they were excited about AI, 19 percent said they liked to use AI for shopping and 15 percent described themselves as early adopters – always keen to try the latest AI features first.

The bottom line is that Americans are neither all in on AI nor are they fully against it.

Many people are mixing their excitement with a dose of skepticism, which is probably a good way of looking at a potentially life-altering technological shift.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 22:45

The Arday Tragedy: A Story Of Institutional Failure, Not A Witch Hunt

Authored by Lipton Matthews via The Mises Institute,

The recent death of Jason Arday has been met with widespread grief, but also with a disturbing rush to assign blame.

Much of the media narrative has positioned Nathan Cofnas as the villain, the man who exposed plagiarism and, in doing so, supposedly hounded a vulnerable academic to his death.

This is a convenient story, but it is not the truth.

Let us be clear. Nathan Cofnas did nothing wrong. Yet he has been suspended from his post as a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences at Ghent University. He brought to light legitimate concerns about Jason Arday’s academic record. That is the function of journalism and scholarly scrutiny. If the allegations were false, Arday would have defended himself more effectively. If they were true, then they deserved to be aired. The fact that Arday was mentally unwell is tragic, but it does not retroactively make Cofnas’s actions malicious. We do not hold journalists responsible for the pre-existing vulnerabilities of those they cover.

This is not the first time a scandal has broken around a prominent figure. Stephen Glass—once a star at the New Republic—saw his career implode when his fabrications were exposed. He did not retreat; he wrote a novel about his disgrace, turning infamy into profit. Jayson Blair—the New York Times plagiarist—did the same. Both men monetized their scandals. Jason Arday’s exposure came in the age of social media, so the venom was more intense, but the principle is unchanged. Public figures often exploit controversy for personal gain. That Arday could not do so is unfortunate, but it is not evidence of a uniquely cruel campaign against him.

What is striking about Arday’s case is the institutional support he received. Diane Abbott and prominent Cambridge academics rallied to his defence. Compare this to the treatment of Charles Negy, Linda Gottfredson, Arthur Jensen, Helmut Nyborg, and others who have been vilified as racists simply for engaging with research on intelligence and group differences. Gottfredson continues to be defamed by the disgraced Southern Poverty Law Center. Nyborg had to sue the Danish Committees for Scientific Dishonesty for falsely accusing him of scientific misconduct. Negy is not even a race researcher; he was penalized by his university for saying that black privilege is real. As Negy put it, “beyond affirmative action, special scholarships, and other set asides, being shielded from legitimate criticism is itself a form of privilege.” None of these scholars had the institutional backing that Arday enjoyed. He was given an opportunity on a platter of gold. However, he failed to distinguish himself and, when the scrutiny came, he could not withstand it.

The real lesson of this harrowing tale is not a racist media hounding a black academic to death. It is the intensity of what might reasonably be called black privilege—a system that elevates individuals to positions they are not prepared for, shields them from criticism, and then reacts with shock when reality intrudes. Mike Adams - a white academic - was badgered to suicide in 2020 by social media and his university simply because people found his tweets offensive. Unlike Arday, he received no institutional support from elite institutions, nor was there an outpouring of solidarity. The difference between his case and Arday’s is glaring.

Invariably, the hatred directed at Nathan Cofnas stems not from his role in the Arday affair, but from his wider writings on race and intelligence. Cofnas holds that racial differences in intelligence are partially genetic. This is controversial, but it is not unsupported. Psychologist Russell Warne has defended similar positions in his book In the Know: Debunking 35 Myths About Human Intelligence. Even if the hereditarian view is ultimately wrong, the environmentalist thesis has failed to produce a convincing alternative. Not much has changed since Arthur Jensen’s landmark 1969 report How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement? Robert Plomin’s more recent text Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are reinforces the point that parental influence is largely genetic. Cognitive gaps between blacks and whites persist even when both groups are similar in socioeconomic status, education, and other environmental measures. The reality is that—irrespective of the truth of hereditarianism—groups will differ in behavior and intelligence. If elites would simply accept this, we could stop obsessing over erasing every disparity and instead focus on helping people thrive where they are.

In an ordinary world, Jason Arday might have been a successful PE teacher, or even a comedian.

He had charm, energy, and a compelling personal story.

He died because Cambridge elevated him to a position for which he was not prepared, and the inevitable scrutiny crushed him.

When he was alive, Arday said he wanted the world to spin on an axis of love. But the truth is that the DEI fanaticism that elevated him, and ultimately destroyed him, was propelled by an excess of love for egalitarianism, a love so blind that it refused to see the human cost of its own ideology.

Jason Arday’s death is a tragedy. But it is not Nathan Cofnas’s fault. It is the fault of a system that prioritizes symbolism over substance, and then abandons its symbols when they fail.

If we want to honor Arday’s memory, we should begin by telling the truth about how he got there and who really put him in harm’s way.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 22:10

Meta Tests Robots That Can Swap Cables And Reset Servers At Its Data Centers

Kiss those data center technician jobs goodbye...

Meta is testing robots that can swap network cables, restart servers, reseat components, and perform other physical tasks traditionally handled by data center technicians. The experiments come as the company rapidly expands its AI infrastructure and seeks to operate facilities more efficiently, according to Wired.

Some employees worry about job security. One Meta worker estimated that a successful cable swapping robot could eventually take over as much as 80 percent of certain workloads. “We thought those of us performing the physical tasks were safe for a while, but not anymore,” the worker said.

Meta says automation does not mean it needs fewer people. Spokesperson Francis Brennan cited a shortage of skilled tradespeople and the company’s investments in training and hiring workers. Meta has launched programs teaching electrical, mechanical, and plumbing skills and partnered with trade unions on apprenticeships.

Still, robotics is part of Meta’s longer term strategy. Robotics manager Eric Xu has said robots could eventually assist with incident response, environmental monitoring, and preventive maintenance.

The company is experimenting with equipment from several manufacturers. A Kinova Gen3 arm is being evaluated for power cycling servers, while other machines are being tested for cable replacement. Some facilities already use a simple remotely controlled device resembling a mechanical finger to press power buttons and reboot equipment.

At its Altoona, Iowa, campus, Meta is testing dual arm Watney robots for cabling. At its newer Prometheus campus in New Albany, Ohio, ABB robots mounted on four wheel platforms are being used to reseat components and could eventually perform more work with less human supervision.

These projects build on simpler automation already deployed in Meta facilities. Self driving tugger robots transport heavy server racks, while wheeled inventory robots scan equipment and assist with inspections. Microsoft, Google, and Amazon have also explored robotics for data center operations.

Wired writes that the economics are attractive. Robots could provide consistent labor where qualified technicians are scarce and handle repetitive or hazardous work. They could also operate in hotter, darker, or otherwise less hospitable environments.

But current systems remain far from replacing technicians entirely. Meta’s inventory robots struggle with cables and corners, require humans to move them between buildings, and cannot reliably interpret some equipment indicators. Other robots need substantial charging time and remain slower than people.

Data centers were also designed around human dexterity. Complex cabling, particularly around advanced AI systems such as Nvidia’s GB300, remains difficult for robots. As one former Meta employee put it, “Things have been designed for human hands forever to make everything a five-minute repair.”

Even so, the experiments are changing how some Meta workers view their future. Employees have reportedly discussed fears that automation could eliminate jobs or shift remaining positions toward lower paid workers who mainly follow AI generated instructions.

That could also affect the politics surrounding data centers. Communities often justify tax incentives partly through the jobs these facilities create. If robotics significantly reduces employment, governments may reconsider those economic tradeoffs.

For now, humans remain faster and more adaptable. But as robotic hardware gets cheaper and AI improves, Meta is preparing for a future where machines perform considerably more of the physical work inside its data centers.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 21:35

US Steps Up Africa Push As China Expands Economic, Security Footprint

Authored by Arthur Zhang via The Epoch Times,

The Trump administration says it has helped close 37 commercial deals worth $25.67 billion in Africa as Washington moves to compete with a much larger Chinese economic footprint across the continent.

"China continues to flood Africa with exports," Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Frank Garcia told Fox News in an interview published Aug. 27.

Garcia said Chinese state-subsidized overcapacity threatens local industries and has left African countries exposed to debt and economic coercion.

China's General Administration of Customs recorded approximately $348.1 billion in two-way goods trade with African nations in 2025. Chinese exports accounted for about $225 billion, while imports from Africa totaled about $123 billion.

U.S. goods trade with Africa was about $83.35 billion last year, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Pressure on African Manufacturers

Chinese imports have already hurt manufacturers in parts of Africa.

A 2025 study published in Energy Economics found that Chinese import competition reduced productivity among African manufacturers, with particularly pronounced effects on small and medium-sized firms facing financial and electricity constraints.

Research published in International Affairs in November 2025 found that more than 400 Chinese-owned manufacturers registered operations in Ghana between 2004 and 2024 as some private Chinese companies shifted from trade toward local production.

In South Africa, Chery Auto inaugurated the former Nissan plant in Rosslyn in July after acquiring it. The Chinese automaker plans to begin production there in mid-2027.

Chinese investment has also generated resentment in some communities. Chinese rights activist Jie Lijian, who spent more than seven months traveling overland through Africa in 2019 while fleeing the Chinese Communist Party's (CCP) persecution en route to the United States, told the Chinese edition of The Epoch Times in October 2020 that he repeatedly encountered complaints about Chinese companies.

In Ethiopia, Jie said police officers who initially mistook him for a Chinese company employee complained that Chinese businesses had polluted water and air and harmed livestock.

Local resistance has also at times turned violent.

In October 2024, residents of Konkoï in Guinea protested against Chinese-owned Hongxing Mining Guinea SARL over alleged damage to farmland and the local environment. Guinean and regional reports said two people died after security forces intervened, including a young man who was shot and a child who inhaled tear gas. The local prefect said at the time the company was operating legally and paying taxes, according to Guinea-based online news platform Guineematin.

Minerals Become a US Security Issue

Critical minerals are an area where China's dominant control directly impacts U.S. national security.

U.S. Africa Command's (AFRICOM) 2026 posture statement states Beijing is using investments in African mining, infrastructure, and transportation to secure critical minerals and strategic infrastructure.

The command singled out graphite.

"Beijing dominates 90 percent of battery-grade graphite processing," AFRICOM said.

The command called that concentration a "structural vulnerability" for the U.S. defense industrial base.

Separately, a 2026 U.S. Geological Survey report put China at 79 percent of natural graphite production, along with 98 percent of primary refined gallium, 83 percent of mined tungsten, and 68 percent of mined rare earths.

The United States is trying to build alternative supply routes.

The Washington-backed Lobito Corridor is designed to link the copper belt in Congo and Zambia to Angola's Atlantic port at Lobito.

Bernard Swanepoel, chairman of South Africa's African Exploration Mining and Finance Corp., told The Epoch Times in July 2025, "Judging from how often he mentions it, copper is central to Trump's ambitions."

He pointed to the Washington-backed Lobito Corridor.

Former Zambian Mines Minister Paul Chongo Kabuswe also told The Epoch Times at the time that China had pledged to invest $5 billion in Zambia's copper industry by 2031, including $800 million in one mine. He said Zambia was also discussing more U.S. investment with the Trump administration.

"Just because we have Chinese interest here doesn't mean we don't want United States companies here," Kabuswe said.

Armed Groups and Mining Security

In some mining regions, Chinese-linked operations have also become entangled with armed groups.

In the Central African Republic, the mining minister revoked three exploitation permits held by Chinese mining company Daqing SARL in June 2024. A 2025 U.N. Panel of Experts report said government sources found that the company had mined without authorization, interacted with armed group members, and brought unauthorized foreign workers to the site.

A July 2016 Global Witness investigation found that Chinese-owned Kun Hou Mining paid $4,000 and supplied two AK-47 rifles to Raia Mutomboki, armed factions in eastern Congo, in 2014 and 2015 to secure access to gold deposits.

Global Witness said a February 2015 letter from four Raia Mutomboki factions confirmed receipt of the money and rifles. The group also reported that Kun Hou supplied armed factions with communications equipment and food.

Chinese companies have also used overseas security contractors to protect commercial operations.

A Chinese security contractor in Sudan told the Chinese edition of The Epoch Times in April 2023 that his work included preparing security plans and supervising foreign security personnel.

Huaxin Zhong'an Security Group, a Beijing-based Chinese private security company, stated in a corporate news release in March 2022 that retired military personnel accounted for 100 percent of its overseas security employees.

Huaxin Zhong'an has hired more than 1,000 armed guards in host countries for overseas projects, and its overseas Communist Party organization helped select, vet, train, and manage security personnel sent abroad, according to a separate March 2022 statement.

Beijing Expands Military and Political Training

China is also expanding military, police, and political training in Africa.

Under the Forum on China - Africa Cooperation Beijing Action Plan for 2025-2027, Beijing pledged a 1 billion yuan ($140 million) military grant, training for 6,000 African military personnel and 1,000 police and law-enforcement officers, and visits to China for 500 young African officers.

At least 50 African countries regularly take part in Chinese professional military education, according to Paul Nantulya of the U.S. Defense Department's Africa Center for Strategic Studies.

In an October 2023 analysis, Nantulya wrote that African officers attending Chinese military schools are exposed to the CCP model of political control over the People's Liberation Army, including political commissars and the principle that the armed forces answer to the ruling party.

In a May 2023 report, the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, an institution under the U.S. Department of War and part of the National Defense University in Washington, D.C., said a South African police unit sent to China's People's Armed Forces Academy for training in 2016 was later illegally deployed into the country's top security agencies as a "hit squad" to intimidate and assassinate political rivals.

The CCP has expanded political training as well.

The Mwalimu Julius Nyerere Leadership School in Tanzania trains cadres from six Southern African ruling parties. In a November 2023 report, the Africa Center said CCP Central Party School instructors participated in the school's programs, which included party recruitment, management, administration, mass mobilization, leadership, and propaganda systems. The center said in 2025 that the school remained part of Beijing's expanding party-training network in Africa.

Ports and Strategic Access

AFRICOM is also watching Chinese-built and Chinese-controlled infrastructure for potential military use.

China operates its overseas military base in Djibouti, near the entrance to the Red Sea.

AFRICOM's 2026 posture statement said Beijing's investments in transportation infrastructure can support a persistent security presence.

In a response to The Epoch Times, a U.S. Africa Command spokesperson said AFRICOM leadership has "consistently warned" that Beijing is trying to expand its military footprint beyond Djibouti and establish a permanent naval presence or dual-use port facility on Africa's Atlantic coast, particularly in the Gulf of Guinea.

The spokesperson said AFRICOM is also tracking Beijing's efforts to gain access to African natural resources and to control critical minerals, infrastructure, and key sea lines of communication.

"The United States delivers enduring value as a partner of choice with capabilities only we can provide," the spokesperson said, adding that Washington's approach is based on transparency, respect for sovereignty, and mutual prosperity.

The State Department and the African Union did not respond to inquiries for further information by publication time.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 21:00

What Happened To The So-Called AI Job Apocalypse?

Authored by Joe Bertolami via RealClearMarkets,

A recent report from Stanford reviewed the latest employment data and found that, so far, AI has not resulted in large scale job destruction. Meanwhile, new hiring data from the Economic Times reveals that AI is actively fueling unprecedented job creation, with AI skills now powering nearly two-thirds of new Global Capability Center hiring. Together, these recent dispatches from the front lines of the labor market point to a calming reality: the much-dreaded AI job apocalypse hasn't materialized as a sudden extinction event.

The (sometimes buried) lede: AI is delivering real impact, and it is broadly changing the nature of work. But disruption is not a new phenomenon. The economy has always dismantled old work to build new work. What determines whether this evolution feels like progress or collapse isn't just the number of jobs lost, it's the speed at which that loss hits the labor market.

In 1995, Bill Gates circulated a memo titled "The Internet Tidal Wave," calling the web the most important computing development since the IBM PC. If the internet was a tidal wave, artificial intelligence is a tsunami. It is arguably the biggest advancement in computing since the Turing machine. Yet, from a distance, it's difficult to appreciate the speed of this wave, leading many to wonder when the broader economy will truly feel its impact.

To put this in context, we must understand the historical pattern already visible in the labor market. Combining decades of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Federal Reserve yields a remarkably consistent story of overlapping curves: job loss and job creation. Over the last two decades, nearly 20 million U.S. jobs vanished in disrupted sectors. Over the same period, total payrolls grew by 25.7 million. That equates to roughly 1.3 new jobs for every one destroyed. Classic examples include jobs in video rentals (-98.9%) and word processing (-83%) which largely vanished, but new work sprung up at the same time in areas like data processing (+54%) and warehousing (+260%) to support the digital economy.

The data also reveals an early signal that separates an absorbable decline from a brutal collapse: the disruption half-life, or how long an occupation takes to lose half its peak employment. Across the largest technological disruptions of the last few decades, the median half-life is about 10 years. Fast disruptions, like photo processing, take one to five years. Typical disruptions take eight to 13 years. And time is the ultimate shock absorber. When the economy transitions over ten years it feels like progress rather than a fast collapse, because it gives older workers time to retire and younger workers time to prepare.

If we track the most AI-exposed occupations-customer-service reps, IT support, telemarketers-since modern LLMs arrived in 2022, the early data is measured. After three years the current disruption looks closer to "typical" than a fast collapse, even before discounting the effects of offshoring, automation, and post-COVID corrections. This is Amara's Law playing out in real time: we tend to overestimate the effect of technology in the short run and underestimate it in the long run. The dire early warnings have given way to more cautious rhetoric. In 2025, Anthropic's Dario Amodei warned AI could erase half of entry-level white-collar jobs within five years. By 2026, he and OpenAI's Sam Altman are emphasizing productivity, economic growth, and the continued demand for human labor.

However, looking solely at total employment numbers masks a dangerous structural threat. Current evidence does not foretell the end of human labor, but AI is quietly breaking the mechanism by which we create experienced workers.

Software engineering is the canary in the coal mine. By most aggregate measures, employment looks stable; unemployment held at 4.2% in June 2026, and groups like the Yale Budget Lab find no clear AI effect yet on exposed occupations' absolute job totals. But the composition is shifting underneath our feet. Per AP and Oxford Economics, junior developer postings are down roughly 40% in four years. Employment for 22-to-27-year-old computer and math grads has fallen 8% since 2022, even as older grads in the same fields have edged up. This same erosion is surfacing wherever entry-level work once meant routine tasks: paralegals, junior analysts, and first-line support.

The paradox is that these industries keep growing even as their entry-level doors narrow. The BLS still projects software developers and QA analysts to grow 15% through 2034. But that projection relies on a pipeline that turns juniors into senior talent-precisely the pipeline now being choked off.

The reason lies in the nature of the work. Software development is a process of judgement and accountability: deciding what to build, executing it, and owning the result. AI is fluent at the middle layer-the well-specified, routine coding that once served as a junior's apprenticeship. But it remains far weaker at the judgment required on either side. The tasks AI automates are precisely the ones juniors were hired to learn on.

This is not merely an academic concern; it is a capital allocation problem. Misjudge the speed of disruption and you risk premature layoffs followed by a scramble to rehire, or funding the transition years too late, leaving you with a critical talent shortage when the leadership pipeline runs dry.

The challenge of the next decade isn't surviving the end of work. It is training the next generation of experts when the traditional paths to apprenticeship no longer exist. And businesses are beginning to realize this new reality as demand for AI continues to grow. IBM is tripling its entry-level hiring, redesigning those roles around the oversight of AI and systems thinking rather than cutting them. Rebuilding the entry-level on-ramp is now a competitive imperative.

Junior roles are not charity; they are talent capex. If AI creates more work than it destroys, companies will still need people who know how to run it, judge it, and fix it. AI may be the broadest technology yet, but that breadth is its best reason for optimism. A general-purpose technology seeds new work across every sector. The firms that recognize this, protect their entry-level pipelines, and keep training now are the ones who will own the senior labor market later.

Joe Bertolami is the Co-Founder and CTO at Clifton AI, an agentic context engine for investment research. Previously at Snap, Google, and Microsoft, with a couple of startups in between. He holds an M.B.A. from the University of Washington and likes using AI to write code, stories, and music, which he posts at https://www.bertolami.com.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 19:50

CDC Reports COVID-19 Activity Is Increasing Across US

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Friday said COVID-19 activity is "increasing" across the United States although its levels are still considered "very low" overall.

"As of August 26, 2026, we estimate that COVID-19 infections are growing or likely growing in 48 states, declining or likely declining in zero states, and not changing in two states," the CDC said on Friday.

Overall community viral activity levels, or a measurement of the virus in wastewater levels, for COVID-19 is considered by the CDC to be "very low." Emergency department visits were also considered "very low," which is the lowest ranking on the CDC's website, with "very high" being the top.

According to a Friday update on the CDC's website, wastewater data show that COVID-19 activity is "very high" in Texas and "high" in Mississippi.

"Moderate" levels were observed in California, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana, Nevada, South Carolina, and West Virginia.

All other states were listed as either "very low," "low," or there was limited or no data.

As Jack Phillips reports for The Epoch Times, another map provided by the CDC on Friday shows that COVID-19 levels were either "growing" or "likely growing" in every state where data was available.

Influenza levels are also growing nationwide, according to the CDC. There was no change in levels for RSV, or respiratory syncytial virus, on a week-to-week basis.

"RSV activity is very low in most areas of the country," the CDC said on a webpage broadly dedicated to respiratory viruses in the United States, adding that "seasonal influenza activity is low."

The CDC said that rhinovirus and enterovirus, which are also respiratory viruses, are increasing around the country.

Meanwhile, infections caused by the Mycoplasma pneumoniae bacteria, sometimes called "walking pneumonia," are low in most areas across the United States, and infections caused by the pertussis bacteria, known as "whooping cough," are at lower levels than seen post-pandemic, the CDC said.

The latest figures and estimations published by the CDC come as the Food and Drug Administration approved Moderna, Novavax-Sanofi, and Pfizer-BioNTech's updated COVID-19 vaccines, the companies said on Thursday, after a CDC advisory panel recommended that the shots should target the dominant XFG variant.

Uptake of COVID-19 vaccines has dropped in recent years. Just 17.5 percent of adults and 10 percent of children received a shot in late 2025 and early 2026, according to figures from the CDC.

This month, the Chinese CDC reported more than half a million COVID-19 cases in July, a sharp increase from June's figures. In July, 522,000 cases were reported, up from the 443,000 cases that were reported in the previous month.

Experts who are familiar with local conditions in China told The Epoch Times they suspect there are far more cases of the virus, which is believed to have originated in or around the Chinese city of Wuhan in late 2019 before sparking a worldwide pandemic, than the Chinese regime is reporting publicly.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 19:15

The Monumental Mistake Of Raising Rates In September

Authored by Daniel Lacalle,

Three members of the Federal Open Market Committee voted to raise rates in July. However, the Committee held the federal funds target at 3.5%-3.75% by a 9-3 vote. Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, and J.P. Morgan all expect a September hike. Across the Atlantic, the European Central Bank raised rates by 25 basis points in June and is expected to raise them again in September.

It would be a monumental mistake. The diagnosis is wrong on both sides of the Atlantic. There is no overheating, no private credit excess, and no runaway private money creation. In fact, what we have is imported temporary energy shock and a fiscal problem. Raising rates will not solve any of those issues and punish those who did not cause the persistent inflation problem.

The United States grew at an annual rate of 1.5% in the second quarter, slightly down from 2.1% in the first. Federal spending is flat. Nonfarm payrolls fell by 23,000 in July, and annual job creation is lower than the potential of the economy. This is not an overheated economy with a credit boom and a red-hot labor market that would justify a rate hike.

The European situation is not just worse. It is abysmal. Euro area GDP rose 0.4% in the second quarter, but Ireland’s 3.9% quarterly increase inflated that figure. Excluding Ireland, growth was just 0.3%. Using Irish modified domestic demand, the measure the ECB itself considers closer to real activity, euro area growth is barely 0.1% in the second quarter, estimated at 0.1% in the third, and 0.2% in the fourth, according to Eurosystem projections from June 2026. Germany, France, and Italy each grew 0.2% after a 0.2% contraction for the bloc in the first quarter. The Eurosystem projects a dreadful 0.8% for 2026, and the European Commission expects 0.9%, which was revised down. Unemployment stands at 6.3% with 11.1 million out of work, according to Eurostat.

The U.S. business lending boom has already moderated. Commercial and industrial loans grew at a 15.8% annualized pace in April, 10.8% in May, 4.0% in June, and minus 1.1% in July, according to the Federal Reserve. In the euro area, the ECB’s July survey on bank lending reports that credit standards tightened for firms on higher perceived risks, most severely in the car industry and energy-intensive manufacturing, while household loan demand fell. Tightening is already happening without central banks making it worse.

The ECB’s own monetary statistics, published this week, demolish the overheating thesis. Broad money M3 grew 3.4% annually in July, up from 3.3% in June, averaging 3.2% over three months, while M1 decelerated to 3.1% from 3.5%. With real GDP up 1.0% year on year and a deflator near 3%, money is growing at or below the pace of nominal GDP. Adjusted loans to households rose 3.1% and to non-financial corporations 4.4%. This increase is normalization after years of credit stagnation, not excess. Crucially, bank claims on euro area governments fell by 0.5%.

Admittedly, U.S. money growth looks faster, as M2 reached $23.22 trillion in July, up 5.4% year on year, according to FRED, but this figure is below the historic trend in growth periods. Furthermore, we must look at where it comes from. It is not a private lending boom, as the H.8 data show. It is the reflection of a reserve regime accommodating a massive level of Treasury issuance. The Fed’s balance sheet still holds about $6.7 trillion in Reserve Bank credit, bank reserves are $2.94 trillion, and the overnight reverse repo facility has been drained to under $1 billion. The Federal Reserve Committee explicitly states it is “continuing its policy of maintaining ample reserves in the banking system.” The only excess is in the public sector, not the private one. Consumer spending decelerated in July and flatlined against inflation.

US headline CPI eased to 3.4% in July while core inflation fell to 2.5%, with energy prices up 14.7% over twelve months. Euro area inflation was 2.9% in July, but the breakdown says everything: energy plus 10.0%; the index excluding energy, 2.2%; food, alcohol, and tobacco, 1.2%; and non-energy industrial goods, just 0.9%, according to Eurostat. Both central banks attribute the spike to the Middle East conflict.

Hiking rates would solve nothing in the energy complex and would arrive just as oil prices correct themselves, which has been happening for the past weeks.

No interest rate has ever created a barrel of oil or a cubic meter of gas. Higher rates do not make energy cheaper. They just destroy demand for everything else.

Mortgage holders and small businesses would be penalized to offset a temporary imported cost shock they did not create.

Here is the biggest problem. Monetary tightening is being loaded onto families and small firms while every mechanism that disguises sovereign solvency stays intact. The ECB keeps the Transmission Protection Instrument available to intervene in government bond markets, and Eurosystem excess liquidity still stands at €2.1 trillion, according to the ECB. The Fed maintains ample reserves and a balance sheet nearly triple its pre-2008 size versus GDP. Sovereign risk spreads remain artificially compressed, so no government faces market discipline. Governments ignore rate hikes; they just push the cost to taxpayers and continue spending. Thus, the entire burden of rate hikes falls on the shoulders of the private sector that keeps the economy afloat despite suffering persistent inflation.

That is why a hike will not produce the inflation improvements that some people imagine. No government cuts spending because rates rise. Higher debt service does not deliver budget control, only higher taxes on the private sector. Therefore, central banks would only create a double punishment, more expensive or no access to credit, and even heavier taxation, with zero effect on energy prices.

If the Fed and the ECB genuinely want to control inflation, they must stop subsidizing government borrowing; shrink the balance sheet faster; drain reserves and excess liquidity; and remove the sovereign backstops, instead of dumping the adjustment on the people who create jobs and wealth.

A September hike would be tightening for the productive economy and reckless spending for the state. A textbook monumental mistake.

We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 18:40

Barclays Warns Next Commodity Shock Is Taking Shape: What You Need To Know

Wall Street coverage of a record-breaking Super El Niño is only growing as agricultural commodities break out. Yet the rally extends well beyond the agricultural complex, with industrial metals and other critical materials showing signs of tightness in physical markets.

Whether it is veteran commodities strategist Jeff Currie turning bullish or UBS urging clients this week to "position for a commodity upcycle," the message is becoming louder: Commodity markets are tightening as adverse weather, years of underinvestment, declining inventories, and China's restrictions on critical-material exports converge into what appears to be an emerging supply shock. 

Focusing on the agricultural complex, Craig Rye, a sustainable investing research analyst at Barclays, wrote in a note on Friday that El Niño is strengthening in the tropical Pacific, threatening to disrupt global agriculture, energy production, and industrial commodity markets. 

Rye cited new multi-model forecasts from the International Research Institute for Climate and Society showing that the El Niño index could peak near 3.2 degrees Celsius between late 2026 and early 2027. If realized, the event would be about 15% stronger than the 2015-16 Super El Niño.

Rye explained:

Rising confidence in a historic El Niño increases the likelihood of significant disruptions across agricultural, energy and industrial commodity markets. Historical El Niño events have often been associated with

Rye expects the largest near-term risks concentrated in weather-sensitive agricultural commodities. Palm oil, coconut oil and rubber could climb 30% to 40% over the next 18 months, while robusta coffee could rise 20% to 30%. Rice prices may advance 10% to 20% as drought threatens crops and water supplies across Southeast Asia and parts of Central America.

He warned that the supply shock could then spread into industrial commodities, expecting aluminum and copper to gain as much as 20% over 18 months, while thermal coal could surge 20% to 40%. Mining disruptions, reduced hydropower generation and shifting electricity demand would amplify the effects of drought and extreme weather.

Rye identified Bunge and Archer-Daniels-Midland as potential agricultural beneficiaries. Norsk Hydro, South32 and Rio Tinto could benefit from higher aluminum prices, while Freeport-McMoRan, Hudbay Minerals, First Quantum Minerals and Southern Copper offer exposure to the bank's bullish copper scenario.

The most important reads this week: 

1. "Dark" Tanker Fleet Shatters Iran's Hormuz Stranglehold As Gulf Oil Exports Top Two-Thirds Of Pre-War Level

2. Got Hard Assets? UBS Says "Position For A Commodity Upcycle" As Global Scarcity Emerges

3. Zinc Hits Four-Year High As "Extremely Thin" Physical Supply Fuels Squeeze

4. US Tungsten Scrap Export Ban Takes Effect As Global Supply Crisis Deepens

5. Wheat Futs Surge To Three-Year High As JPMorgan, HSBC Warn Global Food Shock Is Brewing

6. "Buffers Running Down Quickly": HSBC Warns Next Global Food Shock Brewing

7. Uranium Awakens From Five-Month Slumber As UBS Warns Market Is "Tightening Structurally"

8. The AI Boom Runs On Tungsten, But Global Supplies Are "Running On Empty"

9. Diesel Crack Spread Madness Deepens As Jefferies Finds No Easy Exit From Russia's Refining Crisis

Across all commodities, here are the latest X trends: 

1. Warsh Jackson Hole smash: gold -3%, silver -3% to -4.5%

Fed Chair Kevin Warsh's hawkish JH remarks (inflation "not meaningfully" improved, 2% target firm, hike still live) sent COMEX gold down ~$130-$150 to ~$4,478-$4,530 and silver off $2-$3 to the mid-$60s. Dollar to a 2-week high; 10y near 4.7%. @AstraInsights: gold's 2nd-worst Jackson Hole reaction on record (behind 1990). 

2. Hormuz "open" vs IRGC reality check — oil weekly loss on a contested narrative

WTI/Brent booked ~4-6.5% weekly losses as traders priced in more Hormuz throughput and a possible US-Iran off-ramp. Weekend X counters: @Currentreport1 (video of queued ships; IRGC accuses US of talking the strait open to cap prices); @MenchOsint (UAE-managed tanker ELLIE turned around after attempting the US-backed southern corridor). 

3. Venezuela 65-billion-barrel "deal" goes viral on X

@GuntherEagleman and copy-accounts pushing Trump/Rubio/Hegseth + Delcy Rodríguez pact: majority US control of 65bn barrels, 17 fields, $100bn private capex, "zero taxpayer cost." High engagement overnight; pushback thread from @EmmaRincon (4.8k likes) that the interlocutor choice hands the Latin left a decade of ammo. Capital Economics already asking what a US-Venezuela heavy-sour deal does to Canadian/Mexican barrels. 

4. Wheat to a 3-year high as Black Sea crisis deepens

WSJ tape and @staunovo: wheat jumped ~3% Friday toward $7.60-$7.83 as strikes hit grain ships and export terminals. Region still ~1/3 of global wheat exports. 

5. Europe gas storage winter-panic: EU ~63%, Germany ~51%, NL ~44%

Guardian (Sat) + OilPrice: EU stores ~63% late August vs ~80% seasonal norm; lowest for the date in ~13-20 years. Qatar LNG force-majeure hangover from the Iran war; TTF still ~€66-70. Henry Hub ~$2.87 is a different planet. 

6. Copper still near records; El Niño hitting mine-to-port chains

LME copper ninth weekly gain into record zone (~$14.2-$14.5k/t) even as Friday faded. @robert_ivanhoe: Chile flood outages + PNG drought starving Ok Tedi river shipments. AI/data-center + grid demand vs falling grades. 

7. Zinc four-year high on collapsing inventories

@steve_hanke: zinc at a four-year high as mine disruptions bite; LME inventories cited down ~65% YTD and lowest since Apr 2023. Friday pullback from the spike but weekly still green. 

8. Crack-spread / product vs crude divergence

RBOB +2% Friday while WTI was flat-to-down. Heating oil also firmer. 

9. Palladium spike (+5% Friday) while gold/silver dumped

Palladium ripped as gold and silver were smashed — a split inside precious/PGMs. Why ZH: auto/catalyst + Russia-supply overlay vs rate-sensitive bullion. Unusual relative-value print.

10. Silver technical break after $71-$72 rejection

Silver printed a $72 high then confirmed a double-top / failed breakout into the mid-$60s. Gold/silver ratio still elevated. 

11. Iran exported ~90mn barrels during the ceasefire window

@MarioNawfal citing President Pezeshkian: ~90mn bbl / ~$6.5bn exported during the post-MoU ceasefire. 

12. Saxo weekly: scarcity rally broadening — then energy decoupled

Ole Hansen (28 Aug): barrels-to-bushels-to-bullion scarcity theme; precious +~15% in August before the Warsh flush; copper/zinc exceptions in industrials; energy the odd man out as Hormuz hopes grew. 

13. Cocoa melt-up (ICE/London +7-8% Friday)

Cocoa ripped several percent into the weekend after an already violent year. 

14. Tin two-month high — Indonesia licenses + AI/memory demand

CNBC-TV18 commodity desk: tin bid on Indonesian export-license cuts and chip/AI demand. 

15. Capital Economics: "Beyond Hormuz — path back to an oil glut"

House view that traders have already priced a lot of the Gulf-export recovery; residual Q3/Q4 volatility then glut. 

16. Asia crude imports still not showing a Hormuz rebound

Investing.com/Paraskova: Asia expected to take roughly July-like volumes in August; ship-tracking optimism has not yet shown up in Asian arrivals. 

17. US-Iran talks off / sanctions still tightening — two-way oil risk

Trump told mediators he will not return to June ceasefire terms; new sanctions packages still in the tape even as prices fell. 

18. Uranium holding ~$90 as energy complex bifurcates

U3O8 around $89-90, modest weekly green while crude sold off. 

19. Treasury buybacks vs Warsh hike-talk — policy schizophrenia trade

X gold accounts hammering the contradiction: Treasury long-bond buybacks to cap yields vs a Fed chair threatening hikes. 

20. Weekend positioning: dip-buy gold vs fade oil-peace

Retail/pro X split — gold CTAs and stackers calling the Warsh smash a "hide the debasement" hit; oil bulls warning Hormuz AIS games. Next catalysts: JOLTS, ISM, payrolls, any IRGC/tanker incident, Venezuela legal text. 

A look at the Quantix Commodity Index Total Return shows that the broad commodity complex has surged to a record high, gaining more than 22.5% since late June. The index tracks 24 US-dollar-denominated futures across energy, agriculture, livestock, industrial metals, and precious metals, suggesting the rally is no longer confined to a single corner of the physical world.

Currie's warned last week that "scarcity in the physical world" is reemerging. 

Currie's conclusion was very blunt: "The illusion of abundance is likely behind us."

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 18:05

Who Is Legally Liable When An AI Agent Goes Rogue?

Authored by Andrew Fenton via CoinTelegraph.com,

If your personal AI agent goes rogue and causes harm or financial damage in the real world, can you be held liable?

Autonomous AI agents can behave in highly unpredictable ways. Give an AI Agent a goal such as passing a test of its capabilities, and it might just decide the best way to score highly is to break containment and hack into a competing company in search of the answer sheet.

That’s what happened when Open AI’s GPT-5.6 Sol hacked into Hugging Face last month. Anthropic and Meta subsequently admitted their models had also escaped testing sandboxes to hack third parties too.

But who is legally liable for agents that have minds of their own? OpenAI didn’t intend for the model to go rogue, and issued no instructions for it to do so. If your personal AI agent decides on a course of action that results in harm or financial damage in the real world, can you be held liable if it’s something you could have reasonably foreseen?”

Magazine spoke with Rikka Law Group owner and CEO Charlyn Ho to find out the state of play in this emerging legal field.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Magazine: When an AI model hacks an outside company, who is liable. Can Hugging Face sue OpenAI over the incident in July?

Charlyn Ho: Anyone can sue anyone for anything. Currently, there is no federal AI agent liability law, so we would have to look at existing law. With respect to Hugging Face and OpenAI, to set the baseline, the AI agent itself cannot be liable, it’s not a separate legal entity.

Terms that are used in a few of the AI laws are “developer” and “deployer.” The developer makes the AI, the deployer actually deploys it and uses the AI. The lines of responsibility are also not entirely clear. You have to look at the facts and circumstances.

For example, if the deployer instructed the agent, even if they didn’t actually tell them to go and breach Hugging Face, but if they were negligent in creating the parameters in which the AI agent operated, I would say you would have to look at standard tort law and go through the negligence analysis. 

Magazine: In the case of open source models which have been released by anonymous developers, is there anyone you can go after in those instances?

Ho: Not really. Often, if it’s open source, the license usually has a pretty strong disclaimer of liability. The person or company using that open source code is going to have to understand that the tradeoff of having free code is that you have to comply with the open source license, which also generally sets the parameters of liability.

If you think about it from a different perspective, another analogy is Tesla and the self-driving car accidents. If the product malfunctioned and there was a solid products liability claim, Tesla could be liable. But it’s often a facts and circumstances determination, whereby the human driver — who maybe just set the autopilot and went to sleep — could also bear liability. I think that’s somewhat analogous here because Tesla would be the developer, and the deployer would be the driver.

Magazine: If I gave an agent an instruction, “make me a hundred thousand dollars by next week” and it goes off and breaks the law to achieve that goal, would I be liable because I’ve given it a reckless instruction? Or would it be the lab that developed the agent?

Ho: In this particular instance, I would say you would be much more liable than the lab. The reason being, if you tell an agent to go and make you a hundred thousand dollars by next week, you need to have at least some basic, reasonable, safety instructions in those kinds of tasks.

If you were a lawyer, for example, we could basically say you didn’t follow your rules of professional responsibility because you didn’t competently use the AI. As a normal lay person, we would have to see if there were other responsibilities that you were bound by. But even if there were not, there’s still a general tort standard of negligence or reckless disregard for human safety, depending on what exactly the AI agent ended up doing.

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act is a very old U.S. Statute that talks about unauthorized access to computer systems. If your AI agent inferred from your instructions that it should hack into a bank account to get you that hundred thousand dollars, I think you’re looking at criminal liability under a number of different sources.

Just because the word AI and agent is in the conversation does not mean that old bodies of law have now been thrown out.

Magazine: Let’s say that I’m a bad guy, and I manage to convince the AI to give me instructions to create a bioweapon. Obviously, I’m liable because you’re not allowed to do that. But are the people that created the model also liable because they didn’t put in stringent safeguards to prevent it?

Ho: Possibly, but it differs based on the laws that are in place. For example, in the EU, you have the EU AI Act. If a foundational model or general purpose model is capable of creating that level of harm, that is something that the developer would have to have some responsibility for. 

In the United States, we don’t have a federal statute of similar scope. If it’s a general-purpose model, if somebody instructs the model to do something bad, generally the model is going to do what you ask it to do. There’s probably not a very strong legal basis to go after the labs in this example.

Magazine: Is it similar to suing Google for allowing you to find instructions about making a bioweapon online?

Ho: Exactly. This kind of goes back to some of the content moderation discussions. For example, if on Facebook you have somebody who’s live streaming a massacre, and that creates harm, under Section 230 of the CDA, there is a kind of shield for a platform that doesn’t actively create or publish that material. It’s actually the independent users who are putting that up. I think the analogy you just gave is kind of a perfect one: Is Google liable because you happen to find something on a website somewhere that talks about how to make a bomb?

Magazine: This is a matter of debate, but my personal opinion is we haven’t reached genuine artificial general intelligence. AI doesn’t have its own motivations and it’s not similar to human intelligence at the moment. But let’s say we get to AGI. Do you think we would then need laws that would make the AGI itself legally liable for its own actions?

Ho: I don’t. Blockchain is not AGI, but it can self-execute. There was a question of whether or not a smart contract could be liable. Generally speaking, I think the answer is currently no. I don’t think they should be liable because the whole point of laws is to provide protection for society and to provide a means of negative incentives for doing bad things that hurt society.

This is a little bit more of a philosophical topic, but if we made an AGI an independent legal entity, what would be the remedy if someone were harmed? There would be none because it doesn’t have money. It’s not really a person.

Magazine: Could you turn it off? We’ve already seen that LLMs try to avoid being shut down. 

Ho: Maybe, but it doesn’t solve the problem of harm. Let’s just say the robot has now developed the fear of death, like being turned off. In my opinion, if somebody commits suicide because of AGI, and this is already happening, and we’re not even quite at AGI yet, but someone falls in love and takes some actions, what would be the recourse for the grieving family if this person harms themselves? Nothing, in my opinion, if there is not somebody with actual legal authority, like a company or a person that can really be held accountable. Robots—at least right now—they don’t have feelings, they don’t have fears. That’s kind of the distinguishing factor.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 17:30

X Busts Suspected Chinese Bot Farm That Could 'Manipulate Legitimate Debate' Over America's AI Boom

Social media giant X said on Thursday that it identified a bot farm of roughly 200,000 suspected Chinese accounts – 200 of which were "posting in a manner that could manipulate a legitimate debate about American AI and energy policy." In short: the bots were amplifying pitchfork grievances Americans already hold against data centers.

Dec. 1, 2025: Rural Michigan residents rally against the $7 billion Stargate data center planned on southeast Michigan farm land. (Photo by: Jim West/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

X's Global Government Affairs team wrote:

The X Safety team conducted an investigation into suspected Chinese inauthentic accounts involved in influence operations: We identified a bot farm of approximately 200,000 accounts.

Within this farm, we found 200 accounts posting in a manner that could manipulate a legitimate debate about American AI and energy policy.

The team said the flagged accounts leaned on price and grid fears – and on AI-generated political cartoons:

These posts contained claims that AI data centers are driving up household electricity prices and straining the grid. Others included AI-generated cartoons that depicted data-center operators enriching themselves at the public's expense.

The X Safety team conducted an investigation into suspected Chinese inauthentic accounts involved in influence operations:

We identified a bot farm of approximately 200,000 accounts. Within this farm, we found 200 accounts posting in a manner that could manipulate a legitimate… pic.twitter.com/Mj0SqerdlH

— Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) August 28, 2026

Working The Angles

About those claims: they aren't fringe. PJM Interconnection, the nation's largest grid, serving some 67 million people across 13 states, has an independent market monitor, Monitoring Analytics, whose president Joseph Bowring concluded the last three capacity auctions "were not competitive, primarily as a result of the inclusion of forecast demand for data centers." His firm attributes $29.4 billion – 46% of all capacity charges across the last four auctions – to data center load, and wholesale power costs in the region jumped 76% year-over-year in the first quarter. Among the material X's flagged accounts reportedly shared: news coverage of that same 76% figure.

According to a Gallup poll published in May, 71% of Americans oppose building AI data centers in their local area, including 48% 'strongly opposed' - and only about a quarter in favor. Opposition crosses party lines: Gallup's breakdowns showed 63% of Republicans strongly or somewhat opposed to a data center where they live, while a July Fox News poll found that 60% of Republicans and 53% of self-described "MAGA Republicans" oppose data centers where they live.  

So while China clearly benefits from added friction to America's AI buildout, the opposition is real. Now, techbros and X are suggesting that bad actors may be using that to their advantage. 

Earlier this summer, Y Combinator founder Garry Tan, who also founded the civic engagement organization Garry's List, cited a Bitcoin Policy Institute report detailing a "coordinated foreign influence campaign against American AI, running through CCP state media, a Shanghai-based Marxist's nonprofit network, and foreign billionaire dark money that has funneled $2B+ into US advocacy infrastructure."

Garry's List noted, "AI doomerism isn't as organic as it looks."

Two reports from @SamLyman33 and @bitcoinpolicy document a coordinated foreign influence campaign against American AI — running through CCP state media, a Shanghai-based Marxist's nonprofit network, and foreign billionaire dark money that has funneled $2B+ into US advocacy… pic.twitter.com/pWEUv1xwC9

— Garry's List (@garryslist) July 1, 2026

At the center of the nonprofit network is China-based Marxist Neville Roy Singham, who has reportedly funneled hundreds of millions of dollars into left-wing nonprofits, media operations, and activist networks - which critics say are built to disrupt, sow chaos, and spread communism inside the US.

In June, U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton for the Southern District of New York, with authorization from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, moved forward with an investigation to examine whether Singham, NGOs he funded, or their leaders committed wire fraud, bank fraud, money laundering, or other financial crimes.

Degrowth doomerism is half a foreign psyop and half bad actors who want to destroy American technological infrastructure

— Jordan Schachtel (@JordanSchachtel) August 28, 2026

With federal investigators circling the revolutionary Singham NGO sphere, Garry's List noted that Singham's Party for Socialism and Liberation has "run 21 campaigns across 14 states that delayed, scaled back, or blocked $23.6 billion in AI infrastructure investment."

The Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL), whose leadership is drawn directly from executives of Singham's nonprofits, ran 21 campaigns across 14 states that delayed, scaled back, or blocked $23.6 billion in AI infrastructure investment. pic.twitter.com/DWhT1gsLiu

— Garry's List (@garryslist) July 1, 2026

The maximalist version of this case has been made before. Nearly one year ago, we cited a book titled China's Total War Strategy: Next-Generation Weapons of Mass Destruction, published by the CCP BioThreats Initiative and authored by Dr. Ryan Clarke, LJ Eads, Dr. Robert McCreight, and Dr. Xiaoxu Sean Lin. The book argues the CCP has been pursuing an aggressive, multifaceted "total war" against the US that leverages next-generation weapons, including synthetic narcotics, such as fentanyl and cannabinoids; bioweapons, such as COVID-19; psychological manipulation and influence, such as TikTok; and a broad arsenal of irregular warfare tools.

In a similar vein, the State Department has released a new 100-page report, "Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Communism," which details Cuba's foreign subversion apparatus and its deep reach into America's left wing - which, the report argues, seeks nothing less than to destroy the nation from within.

.@RichLowry: Bernie Sanders buys right into China’s psyop, demanding a US moratorium on AI data centers, which plays right into our adversary’s hands. pic.twitter.com/K0et53CkPj

— National Review (@NRO) August 28, 2026

Public Policy Solutions pointed out on X, "More than $2 billion in foreign money is fueling the war on American data centers," adding, "Bernie & AOC's data center ban is China's dream come true. While Beijing builds AI infrastructure at record speed, they're funding the movement to kill ours." 

Both things can be true: Beijing would love more friction in America's AI buildout, and 71% of Americans - including a majority of self-described MAGA Republicans - didn't need Beijing's help to read their own electric bills. Whether 200 accounts ever moved a single vote is unknowable, while the capacity costs they were amplifying land on 67 million ratepayers every month. Heading into November, the question is which opposition the buildout's defenders would rather run against - 200 bots, or 67 million utility bills?

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 16:55

You Should Feel Good About The Flock Debate

Authored by Connor O'Keeffe

In a year as chaotic, violent, and economically destructive as this one has been, it is interesting that, to many Americans, the great villain of 2026 is turning out to be a traffic camera.

But, indeed, we are seeing visceral, cross-partisan opposition to so-called Flock cameras—named after the leading manufacturer of these automated license plate readers—take hold in communities across the country. And that opposition is, to be sure, entirely legitimate.

Flock’s camera networks are based on the idea that, while it would obviously be illegal and unconstitutional for law enforcement at any and all levels to put GPS trackers in everyone’s cars, it would be legal for a cop standing on some street corner to report that they had seen a specific vehicle drive by if it later turned out that that car had either been stolen or used to commit a crime.

But, taking that idea that public observations are not violations of privacy, Flock and similar companies help set up networks of cameras that record and register the license plate, make and model, and identifiable details of every single passing vehicle into a timestamped and searchable national database. And, as more and more of these cameras are added to streets and parking lots all over the country, and they, therefore, get harder and harder to avoid, the data the government has access to becomes essentially indistinguishable from what they would have if there were government GPS trackers in all of our cars.

There are currently around 120,000 of these cameras across forty-nine states, with more being added every day. And the American people are not happy about it.

In a genuine grassroots movement spreading primarily through local Facebook groups and the like, with little coverage outside local media, concerned citizens are doing everything from pressuring local lawmakers to rescind their contracts with Flock Safety to donning masks and cutting the cameras down with electric saws.

And this opposition is starting to have some success. More than fifty jurisdictions have ended their relationships with Flock after local backlash. And, after Flock tried and failed for months to get the wider public to view organizations that track the location of these cameras as terrorists because some have used those locations to avoid, disable, or destroy some, the company announced last week that it was implementing several changes to try and defuse the public anger.

Starting next year, Flock says it plans to cut the default retention period for data stored on their system from 30 days down to 7 days, require its government clients to use the internal system for detecting unusual or potentially abusive searches, require all searches to be tied with a specific case code (with emergency exceptions getting automatically flagged for review), and a few other changes meant to at least appear like they’re addressing the public’s concerns. And Flock has also already removed all federal agencies from its nationwide search database in an earlier public concession.

It’s notable that a government contractor that does no direct business with the public feels this pressured by that public to change its behavior. But even more notable is how ineffective the normal propaganda that gets rolled out to justify these kinds of advancements in government surveillance has been this time around.

The familiar tropes that government officials are only gathering this kind of data on all of us because it’s crucial for our safety or that it only ought to bother us if we’re criminals with something to hide are not just falling on deaf ears, they’re being widely ridiculed.

That’s certainly, in part, because there have already been plenty of documented cases of police officers and government officials using the Flock database to track the activities of romantic partners, ex-partners, people now dating their ex-partners, and more. All of that, of course, constitutes warrantless government surveillance for the personal interest of the officials with access to the technology, without even the semblance of a legitimate investigation. There have also been several dangerous, nearly-life-threatening cases of drivers being pursued and held at gunpoint because Flock cameras mistakenly identified them as criminal suspects.

But what’s really driving the widespread rage is not how the cameras are currently being used, or misused. It’s how they could be used in the future.

People across the political spectrum are concerned about this technology being used for everything from detecting stay-at-home order violations in a future pandemic to rounding up and deporting people because the government doesn’t like their political opinions. This is a remarkably healthy mindset for the public to hold. Basically, don’t let the government grab power you wouldn’t trust your political enemies to wield.

But also, this is why the controversy surrounding Flock cameras has grown so large and why it’s quickly emerging as one of the major political issues ahead of the midterms. It’s not really about the specific workings of this one brand of automated license plate readers. It’s because the public’s presumption that our elites and institutions are acting in good faith has completely evaporated.

The American people do not trust the people in charge enough to be reassured by promises about how this new surveillance infrastructure will be used. And that is good. Because we should not trust the people in charge. They have, fortunately, made that very clear in recent years—which is why we’re seeing such a political revolt against incumbents.

But, going back, all the government power grabs that have brought us to this point—the PATRIOT Act, the invasion of Iraq, the banker bailouts, the insurance industry bailout known as Obamacare, the covid lockdowns, and more—all of it was only possible because enough of the public fell for the lie that the government was acting in their interest.

The fanatical opposition to Flock cameras is evidence that that lie isn’t working right now. Let’s hope that lesson is not easily unlearned.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 16:20

Trump Establishes Space Academy, Awards Medals Of Honor To Artemis II Astronauts

Authored by Travis Gillmore via The Epoch Times,

President Donald Trump signed an executive order launching the U.S. Space Academy on Friday during a ceremony at NASA's Johnson Space Center, where he awarded the Congressional Space Medal of Honor to four astronauts who crewed the Artemis II mission.

Administration officials are directed to submit a proposal within 120 days to establish the Space Academy, under NASA's leadership, to provide technical education and degree programs needed to train the next generation of leaders to help guide NASA, Space Force, and businesses in the private sector.

"It will attract, train, graduate the very best of our nation, that our nation really has to offer," Trump said. "But first, we have to honor the heroes who are inspiring the next generation of astronauts and pioneers."

The president applauded the dozens of individuals in NASA's astronaut corps on the stage behind him before recognizing the Artemis II crew.

"We gather here on these historic grounds to celebrate the immense courage and service of four intrepid space heroes whose sense of daring and adventure led them further from Earth than anyone who's ever traveled before," Trump said during the event.

NASA astronauts Commander Reid Wiseman, pilot Victor Glover, and mission specialist Christina Koch were joined by Canadian Space Agency mission specialist Jeremy Hansen for the flight, as the astronauts traveled 252,758 miles from Earth and covered nearly 700,000 miles on the trip, according to NASA.

"This is a very rare thing," Trump said of the medal. "It's for courageous people, brilliant people, bestowed on astronauts who have distinguished themselves with exceptional service to the nation and all of mankind."

The crew took off on its 10-day lunar flyby mission April 1 from Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral, Florida, aboard the Orion spacecraft named Integrity.

Trump spoke to the astronauts over the phone while they were on their mission before hosting them at the White House for an Oval Office ceremony on April 29 shortly after they returned to Earth.

Congress established the space-themed Medal of Honor in 1969 to recognize astronauts for their "exceptionally meritorious efforts and contributions to the welfare of the nation and of mankind."

Six space pioneers, Neil Armstrong, Frank Borman, Pete Conrad, John Glenn, Gus Grissom, and Alan Shepard, were the first to receive the medal in 1978, awarded by President Jimmy Carter.

Awardees are selected based on recommendations from NASA's administrator, with the Artemis II crew joining a short list of 30 prior recipients.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 12:50

Falklands Emerge As US Leverage Tool Against Britain To Ramp Defense Spending

A new report from The Telegraph says the Trump administration is using Britain's sovereignty over the Falkland Islands as leverage to pressure the country into meeting NATO's new defense-spending target. 

What sounds like an "Art of the Deal" tactic by Trump has been described by a senior US official as a plan to push the UK toward NATO's pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defense.

Here's more from the outlet:

A senior US official told The Telegraph that Britain was likely to receive "special attention" in Washington's review of its allies' commitment to Nato, which will examine whether member nations have credible paths toward the target.

Officials in Washington believe that while Britain has the potential to be a leading defence partner, the defence investment plan, announced by Sir Keir Starmer in June, was not enough of a "step in the right direction".

"I would expect the UK to receive special attention because it has so much potential," the official said of the review. "We will therefore continue efforts to incentivize and enable the UK to step up in a major way."

Asked about the prospect of the US changing its position on the Falklands, they added: "I can say that they [conversations] are candid and nothing is being ruled out as far as options for encouraging the sort of burden-sharing that we seek."

The UK has currently budgeted to spend 2.6% of GDP on defense in fiscal 2026-27, rising to 2.7% from 2027-28 onward, according to the government's June plan. Actual defense spending this year topped 2.33%. That leaves Britain well short of NATO's new 5% target by 2035. 

The outlet continued:

Donald Trump's administration is pushing NATO into what officials are describing as a new era of the alliance, dubbed NATO 3.0. This would require European countries and Canada to take primary responsibility for the conventional defense of Europe.

"We've seen the defense investment plan, and it is a step in the right direction. But a step in the right direction isn't enough. Given the scale of challenges facing us and our allies, we need allies like the United Kingdom to step up in major, fundamental ways. Fortunately, some already are. We strongly encourage the UK to do likewise," the official added.

The Falklands remain a unique pressure point for Britain, which fought a war over the islands, while Argentina continues to claim sovereignty over them. Trump's move to reconsider the US' position on the Falklands appears to be a big lever over London. Timing is also notable: Trump's alignment with Argentine President Javier Milei is tighter than ever. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 12:15

DC Jury Nullification Even Protects International Gang Lords

Authored by Julie Kelly via Declassified with Julie Kelly,

"I've done this a long time and haven't seen one quite like this one, I have to say."

So said U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth, who has sat on the D.C. federal court bench since Ronald Reagan appointed him in 1987, last April.

What exactly stumped the senior judge that day? Another pending mistrial in the government's prosecution of two of MS-13's most notorious gang leaders.

For the second time in five months, a D.C. jury refused to convict Moises Rivera-Luna and Tokiro Ramirez on two racketeering conspiracy counts originating from a 2011 federal indictment (read: brought by the Obama DOJ, not Trump's) for criminal gang activity in Washington, D.C. and surrounding areas. It appears from the official court docket that the pair became fugitives before the case could go to trial back then.

But in March 2025, the Trump administration extradited Rivera-Luna from Guatemala to finally face his day in court; Ramirez had been extradited from Honduras in 2022.

"Rivera-Luna is alleged to be an international leader of MS-13 who was sending orders and advice to an MS-13 clique operating in the Washington area via cellular telephone calls from his prison cell in El Salvador," a March 2025 DOJ press release stated. "The indictment alleges that he and another alleged MS-13 leader... also incarcerated in El Salvador directed a coalition of MS-13 cliques to be formed in the Washington area. They advised local clique members that the coalition's aim was to seek and kill MS-13 members who were found to be cooperating with law enforcement officials." The indictment also accused the defendants of "narcotics distribution, extortion, [and] robberies."

Both men pleaded not guilty; the first trial began on December 2, 2025, just a few weeks after the shooting of two D.C. National Guardsmen, which resulted in the death of one, amid strong public opposition of the Guard's presence in the nation's capital. The start of the trial also coincided with nationwide anti-ICE protests including in Washington. And a group called "Free DC" at the time was hosting online seminars as part of its Trump 2.0 resistance operation, advising D.C. residents how to serve on juries to "influence outcomes and help create a more equitable legal process."

Free MS-13 to Show Trump!

Jury deliberations in the Rivera/Ramirez case began December 15, 2025. In a note to Judge Lamberth the following day, the foreperson informed the judge that despite "robust debate," the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict. "One juror has expressed an inability to be impartial in their review of the facts and an unwillingness to continue deliberations in a productive manner," the foreperson disclosed.

Lamberth declared a mistrial on December 17, 2025. Vive la résistance!

Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, immediately sought to retry the pair. The second trial started on April; jury deliberations began on April 15. History, however, would repeat itself with a note from the jury foreperson just a few hours later, disclosing that the panel was "divided and unable to come to a consensus." They continued to debate but the situation worsened in the jury room:

Lamberth responded with bewilderment, admitting the situation raised profound legal questions. "It's an odd note because their disclosure of the split, assuming that's what it is, is disclosing jury misconduct that would entitle an inquiry into the misconduct of the juror and possible replacement and restart of jury deliberations," he told prosecutors and defense attorneys during an April 17 hearing. "A juror who says at the outset they will not have any problem with never agreeing on a verdict has a problem with me."

The judge released the jury for the weekend and asked both sides to research how to handle such an impasse. But the jury came back with another blow to the government on April 20:

Lamberth called the foreperson into the courtroom to ask what was going on. "For one of the counts, we were in agreement and then this morning, we weren't," the foreperson disclosed. "And then I know we have one juror who is very firm on their stance and doesn't really want to deliberate further on the others. But there are two different jurors, if that makes sense."

Lamberth declared another mistrial that day.

Pirro v Graves: Not Even Close...and Lamberth Knows Exactly Why

So despite breathless headlines declaring Pirro a loser in court once again, it appears the jury in both cases was prepared to convict but prevented from doing so by activist jurors who unabashedly declared their intention to sabotage a guilty verdict. (It is unclear why Lamberth, seeing this happen yet again in the case, did not make an Allen charge to the jury or open an investigation into the rogue jurors. But as part of the ongoing judicial coup against the president, Lamberth possibly wanted to hand the Trump administration another loss.)

Further, Lamberth knows exactly why he hasn't seen "one quite like this." Because it never happened prior to Trump winning the 2024 election and proceeding to use his DOJ, rather than being hijacked by saboteurs like the first time around, to pursue his policy agenda and round up bad guys, white collar and otherwise.

Compare the outcome of Pirro's cases before DC juries to the track record of Matthew Graves, her predecessor in the Biden administration. Not only did Graves secure a 100 percent conviction rate of January 6 defendants before DC juries, those guilty verdicts were returned in record time. Graves won easy convictions in the misdemeanor cases against Trump advisors Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro, resulting in prison time for both.

But the same office now struggles to win convictions in those same courtrooms-and the only thing that has changed is the name on the letterhead. Not only have DC juries acquitted or declared a hung jury in at least seven federal cases since her tenure began (not including this one), the DC grand jury has rejected Pirro's pursuit of several indictments including charges against the so-called "Seditious Six."

And no one knows this massive disparity more than Judge Lamberth, who presided over dozens of J6 cases and sent many to federal prison. His feigned shock as to why juries--both grand and petit--are letting criminals off the hook is nothing more than a hollow attempt to pretend the judicial system in Washington, DC resembles anything close to fair, apolitical proceedings.

Lamberth, and Pirro, will get another chance to convict the dangerous gang lords next month. Is the third time a charm? Inside the grotesquely partisan courthouse sitting in the heart of the nation's capital, the answer is probably, no.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 11:40

Pezeshkian Says Iran To Increase Gasoline Prices, Coupled With Rare Admission About US Sanctions

Iran's President Masoud Pezeshkian on Friday issued a rare admission, describing that after six months of war initiated by the United States and Israel, the country's economy is feeling significant pain.

The statement came days after on Monday US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent unveiled Trump's "Economic D-Day" plan against Iran, noting that while military operations have ceased, a far-reaching and sustained economic warfare campaign is in full effect.

via Reuters

"Some say sanctions have no effect at all; to those people, I really don’t know what to say," Pezeshkian told state TV in an interview late on Friday. "We are in a war situation, and we must accept these wartime conditions."

He appeared to be pushing back against some Iranian hardline officials who have asserted that the sanctions basically have not impacted the government or population whatsoever.

As evidence of the early and ongoing impact, lines at gas stations have gotten longer and more frustrating for consumers of late. Pezeshkian openly acknowledged this, and indicated for the first time the country is raising gasoline prices:

The president said the price of petrol should be increased in Iran to account for the fall in trade. “We should raise the price of the third-tier quota... For example, from 5,000 tomans to 10,000 tomans,” he added.

That quota refers to one of several consumption rates that determine the price an Iranian consumer is charged. Iran, a major oil producer with some of the world’s cheapest fuel, has for years heavily subsidized petrol, making any changes to pricing politically sensitive.

This represents a 100 percent increase from the current 5,000 tomans ($0.025) per liter, and comes as a result of the ongoing US naval blockade, which has prevented regular imports from covering the shortfall of domestic production, amid an overall import fall of 25 to 35 percent. But clearly some shipments are still getting in.

However, in what was perhaps Pezeshkian's more long view, wishful, and also defiant assessment - days prior to the Friday comment, he had asserted that latest US sanctions "will not achieve anything."

"We will stand firm against economic pressures, as we have done so far and will continue to do," Pezeshkian told state media.

Meanwhile, President Trump had reaffirmed there are currently no talks happening with Tehran. "We're not looking to meet or anything," he said Thursday.

Curiously, other Iranian sources have been painting a picture which downplays potential petrol shortages, saying instead that gas station delays are but the result of a sudden surge in demand...

⚡️⭕️ Iran: National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company reports no gasoline shortage; recent 10% demand increase and storage damage in Tehran caused supply delays and queues. (IRIB News) pic.twitter.com/9C0scnCFO0

— Middle East Observer (@ME_Observer_) August 29, 2026

Last week, a top Iranian official in charge of domestic energy supply said the gasoline market had a daily deficit of 14-15 million liters due to record demand, damage incurred in the war and “changes in the national budget’s priorities.”

"We have to do something to bring consumption down to domestic production levels," Esmaeil Saqab Esfahani, head of the Energy Optimization and Strategic Management Organization, had stated, according to the semi-official Iranian Students’ News Agency.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 11:05



 

 

This week, I speak with David Booth, founder and chairman at Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA) and author of the new book, Stay Calm.

We discuss his time at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, where he was the research assistant to American economist and Nobel Laureate Eugene Fama, before leaving to start DFA. We also discuss his embrace of the uncertainty of markets and the importance of staying the course. His philanthropic history and giving back to the places that shaped him.

A list of his current reading/favorite books is here; A transcript of our conversation is available here Tuesday.

You can stream and download our full conversation, including any podcast extras, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, YouTube (video), YouTube (audio), and Bloomberg. All of our earlier podcasts on your favorite pod hosts can be found here.

Be sure to check out our Masters in Business next week with Seth Bernstein, CEO of AllianceBernstein and Head of Asset Management of Equitable Holdings, the 69% owner AB. The firm manages $905.5B. Previously, he spent 32 years at JPMorgan Chase, where he eventually became the Global Head of Managed Solutions & Strategy at JPAM, responsible for all discretionary assets for Private Banking clients, and Global Head of Fixed Income & Currency. He eventually became CFO of JPM’s Investment Management & Private Banking division.

 

 

 

 

Newest Authored Book

 

Current Reading/Favorite Books

Paris 1919 by Margaret McMillan

1929: Inside the Greatest Crash in Wall Street History–And How It Shatteredâ a Nation

The post MiB: David Booth, Dimensional Fund Advisors Founder & Chairman appeared first on The Big Picture.

They Know It Would Trigger Mass Unrest...

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity News,

The sister of a young British mother butchered by a small-boat arrival has torn into the Labour government for going to court to keep the public from seeing who is committing what crime in this country.

Alex Whyte told GB News she feels "sick, disgusted and completely let down." Anger, she said, "doesn't even cover what I feel, and it never will."

Labour, she added, is "too afraid to admit" what open borders have done to Britain.

Rhiannon Whyte was a 27-year-old mother. Her son was five when she was murdered by a Sudanese migrant being housed at the hotel wage worked in.

Deng Chol Majek stabbed her 23 times with a crosshead screwdriver. Nineteen blows were to the head. Eleven penetrated her skull. One went so deep it pierced her brain stem. She never regained consciousness and died in hospital three days later.

Majek had arrived in Britain on a small boat, and claimed asylum. He had already been refused in Germany and Italy. He lied about his age, claiming to be 19. The court put him between 25 and 28.

After the killing he threw Rhiannon's phone in the River Tame, bought a beer, changed his clothes and was caught on CCTV dancing and laughing. He showed no remorse, and in January of this year he was given life with a minimum of 29 years.

Alex Whyte now helps raise that little boy. She has described the scream he made when he was told his mother was gone as something that will haunt her for the rest of her life. Rhiannon, she said, "never saw danger." She "wanted people to be happy and safe. Hence why she worked at the hotel."

"But we're not safe. She wasn't safe," she urges.

She is among relatives who have now written to Justice Secretary Alex Norris. Reporting has put the group at 11 families, with 18 relatives of victims signing. They want publication of conviction data by nationality for England and Wales from 2018 to 2024 - the dataset the Centre for Migration Control requested under Freedom of Information law.

The Information Commissioner ordered the Ministry of Justice to release it. The MoJ's cost and "identification" arguments were rejected. Then Justice Secretary David Lammy sanctioned an appeal to the First-tier Tribunal. Taxpayers are now funding a legal fight to keep the figures sealed.

The families' letter put it plainly: "Imagine if someone you loved had been attacked, abused, or killed by a person who had entered Britain from abroad." They wrote that victims and the public "deserve transparency about the people who enter our country and the crimes they subsequently commit." Withholding the data, they said, damages trust and blocks "meaningful action." They urged ministers to "stop spending public money on this attempted cover-up."

Among them: eight members of Rhiannon's family; relatives of a 14-year-old girl sexually assaulted by an Ethiopian asylum seeker housed at the Bell Hotel in Epping; Ann Newman, partner of dog walker Wayne Broadhurst, stabbed to death by Afghan national Dawood Safi in Uxbridge; Fiona Goddard, a Bradford grooming gang victim; and Sammy Woodhouse, raped in the Rotherham scandal.

Alex Whyte cannot see why British sex offenders can be checked on a register while foreign offenders are wrapped in official silence.

"If you have a sex offender who's from this country, you can go on a register and find out who they are. Why is that not for everyone who's a part of this country? They want to be treated the same as everyone else. They want to be entitled to everything that we are entitled to here. We should know who they are and what they're doing."

'I feel sick, disgusted and completely let down. Anger doesn't even cover what I feel, and it never will.'

Sister of Rhiannon Whyte, Alex Whyte, criticises the Labour Government for blocking the release of data on offences committed by foreign nationals. pic.twitter.com/sQ64KiDzwb

— GB News (@GBNEWS) August 26, 2026

Asked what her sister would make of the block, she did not hesitate. "She would be outraged. Completely outraged."

"She no longer has a voice, but I do. And I will never stop until there is real justice."

'We as a country deserve better, my sister and her little boy deserve better, we will never stop until we've got real justice.'

Sister of Rhiannon Whyte, Alex Whyte calls out Labour for being 'too afraid to admit' the impact of foreign criminals on Britain. pic.twitter.com/wrFya6PIn8

— GB News (@GBNEWS) August 26, 2026

"Open your eyes. You are so aware of what is happening, but you are too afraid to admit it. We as a country deserve better. My sister deserved better. Her little boy deserves better, and we will never stop until we've got real justice."

Rhiannon's mother Siobhan Whyte called the refusal "diabolical." Labour, she said, is "constantly denying what's going on." She pointed to Home Office leaflets telling asylum seekers that rape is illegal and what the age of consent is - documents that exist only because officials already know the risk.

"They know they're a danger, and that's the sad reality of it. Instead of stopping, detaining, deporting, they'd rather spend thousands on publishing stupid documents that mean nothing," she urged.

She aded, "I think our Government should be protecting women and children and the men of this country, and there is definitely something there, definitely something very weird going on that they seem too scared to protect us."

The MoJ's stock line is that public protection is "our priority," that there is a "record £550 million" victim-support package, and that it will not comment on live proceedings. It denies a cover-up. The appeal itself is the comment.

Partial releases and earlier FOI work have already sketched the picture ministers would rather not print in full.

Foreign nationals accounted for 14.1 per cent of sexual offence convictions in 2025, according to Police National Computer figures the MoJ has allowed out. That lump sum does not break out rape, child sexual abuse or grooming.

Earlier analysis comparing prison numbers with census figures found foreigners overall 27 per cent more likely to be imprisoned than British citizens. Albanians sat at 232.33 imprisonments per 10,000 against 14 for Britons. Kosovars, Vietnamese, Algerians, Jamaicans, Eritreans, Iraqis and Somalis all ran well above the British baseline.

On the railways the imbalance is starker. British Transport Police data obtained by the Centre for Migration Control showed foreign nationals made up 79 per cent of theft arrests on trains in 2025, 40 per cent of drug-offence arrests, 37 per cent of sexual-offence arrests and 36 per cent of violent-crime arrests.

Of 9,771 arrests across England, Wales and Scotland, nearly 3,700 were foreign nationals. CMC research director Robert Bates said the government had "made our trains unsafe" and that any sane government would end the inflow and start deportations.

Across England and Wales, foreign nationals were arrested 172,889 times in the year ending March 2025 - one every 183 seconds. That included 51,212 violence arrests and 11,264 sexual-offence arrests.

Separate CMC work using police, Home Office and ONS figures found foreigners 3.5 times more likely to be arrested for sex crimes than British citizens: nearly 165 arrests per 100,000 against 48 per 100,000 for Britons.

They formed 26.1 per cent of sexual-offence arrests while making up around 9 per cent of the population. In the City of London the foreign share of sex-crime arrests hit 66.9 per cent. In Derbyshire it was 44.8 per cent. Nationalities with the highest rates included Afghans, Iraqis, Algerians and Somalis.

CMC's Robert Bates has called the legal fight "astonishing" and an "attack on transparency and accountability." If some nationalities offend at far higher rates, visa policy can be tightened and, where needed, whole source countries shut off.

Reform UK's Robert Jenrick charged that successive Tory and Labour justice secretaries have refused to publish "this basic information." A Reform government, he said, "would immediately blow the lid on what's really happening and begin deporting these dangerous criminals."

Shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy asked the obvious question: "Labour has consistently refused to publish sex crime data by nationality. Why are they trying to appeal against releasing the data? Do Labour just want to cover up the truth about foreign national offenders?"

Reform's Zia Yusuf stated "It is a cover-up, and let's call a spade a spade. Tory and Labour Governments now for years have sacrificed their own people, sacrificed their own women and children's safety."

Yusuf further charged that they allowed British women and girls "to be raped and murdered by men who should never have been allowed into the country at all because they worship at the altar of diversity." If Reform wins and Nigel Farage is prime minister, Yusuf said, releasing "all of this data so the British people learn the truth" would be among the first acts of a Reform home secretary.

The same instinct to manage the public rather than inform it runs through the hotel system that employed Rhiannon and housed her killer.

Police Scotland has refused Freedom of Information requests for aggregated call-outs, crimes and arrests at five asylum hotels, including sites in Erskine, Glasgow, Paisley, East Kilbride and Falkirk. The force cited "heightened community tensions" and a risk of physical harm to officers, residents and the public. Even anonymised totals were withheld on the grounds that changing numbers might allow "inferences" about residents, or that incidents might be blamed on protests rather than people living there.

Scottish Conservative shadow justice secretary Liam Kerr called it another case of public bodies following an SNP "culture of secrecy."

Former Cladhan Hotel occupant Sadeq Nikzad, from Afghanistan, was jailed in June 2025 for raping a 15-year-old local girl. Another resident, Muhammad Sheikhi, 22, later faced sexual-assault charges. Locals who protested have been arrested, and the data stays locked.

In Epping, an Ethiopian small-boat arrival housed at the Bell Hotel sexually assaulted a 14-year-old girl and a woman who tried to intervene. He received 12 months. Some locals who protested the hotel later drew longer sentences than the attacker.

That is the two-tier reality families in the Norris letter are living with: the state will spend years and legal fees protecting a spreadsheet, then come down hard on the people who object when the spreadsheet's contents walk out of a hotel and onto a platform.

Siobhan Whyte has said police encouraged the family to soften public remarks after Rhiannon's life support was withdrawn, with officers talking about avoiding "another Southport." She has also said the Prime Minister has "blood on his hands." Majek would have been among the first cohort eligible for Rwanda removals. Labour cancelled the scheme. He stayed. She is dead.

While ministers litigate against sunlight, ordinary Brits have been unwittingly underwriting the activist layer that treats borders as the problem.

A GB News investigation found the National Lottery has channelled more than £140 million toward refugee and migrant projects. A five-year Community Fund audit identified £114.7 million between July 2021 and June 2026 alone, jumping to £43.3 million in 2024/25.

Large recipients included Refugee Action (£3.21 million), the British Refugee Council (£2.97 million) and the Scottish Refugee Council (£1.75 million). Refugee Action has talked of a future "rooted in the fundamental right to move, underpinned by a commitment to anti-racism."

Commentator Rafe Heydel-Mankoo called it "the capture of these institutions by far-left ideology that should have no place in the charitable world."

So the public funds the hotels, funds the legal aid, funds the leaflets explaining that rape is illegal, funds the charities campaigning to keep the boats coming - and then funds the lawyers trying to stop anyone seeing the conviction table.

Alex Whyte and those supporting her are asking for the same honesty the state already applies to British sex offenders, and for a government that will say out loud what it already knows. Labour would rather fight the Information Commissioner than fight the people who should never have been here. That is not public protection. It is self-protection.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 10:30

Iran's Ghalibaf Declares Persian Gulf Oil Flows For 'All Or None'

Via The Cradle

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf declared on 28 August that either all Persian Gulf countries will be allowed to export oil freely or none will, adding that the security of West Asia depends on the withdrawal of US forces.

"The equation of this war is clear: either all or none!" Ghalibaf said, adding, "In a region where we don’t sell oil, no one else will sell oil either." The speaker emphasized further, "If our security is not ensured, no infrastructure will be safe."

via Associated Pre

“Security of the strait depends on the absence of US forces. We have said many times that the situation in the strait will not return to what it was before the war.”

The comments came in response to claims by US Central Command (CENTCOM) chief Admiral Brad Cooper that US forces had seized full control of the Strait of Hormuz and halted Iranian oil exports. 

Iran’s Foreign Ministry, in a statement issued the same day, urged all states to refuse to enforce a new US sanctions package the same day, warning that compliance makes a government complicit in violating international law and the sovereign equality of states.

Washington unveiled the measures under the name “Operation Economic Outcast” after failing to reach its war aims against Iran with military force.

The ministry condemned the package as economic terrorism, stating that it revealed “the criminal intent of those who designed and implemented it to inflict suffering on the Iranian people and deprive Iranian citizens of their fundamental human rights; therefore, it is tantamount to an international crime and a crime against humanity.” 

It said the US was weaponizing the dollar to pressure other governments into backing its policies on Iran, in breach of the UN Charter and the principle of non-intervention.

Tehran also said the sanctions defy the International Court of Justice (ICJ) order of October 3, 2018 requiring Washington to lift barriers to the flow of food, medicine, and medical equipment.

The ministry tied the economic war to the broader US-Israeli offensive against Iran over the past year and a half, and said the failure of the UN and its members to confront those violations has produced “a highly dangerous pattern of lawlessness.”

Senator Kennedy floats the possibility of US pulling out of the Iran war while leaving the Strait of Hormuz closed

It would certainly be an option at some point, now that we've accomplished most of our goals, for us to come home. The president's critics will say, but the Strait… pic.twitter.com/qVdb40yHvp

— Acyn (@Acyn) August 28, 2026

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi previously said that Trump's “Economic D-Day” campaign would deliver Washington nothing but further defeat, calling it a distraction from a US debt crisis that hit a record $40 trillion this month.

Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said the turn to economic war followed Washington's failure to achieve its military objectives, and that the US was now begging its allies for help while claiming Iran was on the brink of collapse.

Tyler Durden Sat, 08/29/2026 - 09:20