• Starmer Calls for Spyware on All Phones

• Belfast Riots: British Politicians Blame Elon Musk

• BP Scraps Net Zero division

Starmer Calls for Spyware on All Phones

In a speech at London Tech Week, Prime Minister Keir Starmer issued a request to tech companies operating in the UK - introduce device controls that prevent children from sending and receiving explicit images or face punishment, the BBC reports.

The government says Britain will become the first country in the world to stop children taking, sharing, or viewing naked pictures on their devices.

Companies have three months to make changes or the government will bring forward legislation to force them, the PM said.

This is yet another measure being introduced in the name of the ‘protection of children,’ but it will, in practice, undermine everyone’s privacy. As Reclaim The Net puts it, Starmer is essentially calling for spyware to be installed on all phones. “The trouble is the two innocent-looking words tucked into the speech like a wasp in a picnic basket, the words “device-level.” Here is what “device-level” means once you peel off the cuddly branding. To catch one naughty photo on your phone, something has to inspect every photo on your phone. All of them,” they wrote.

Starmer’s announcement was also met with criticism by Big Brother Watch, which called it “extreme technological censorship”.

Belfast Riots: British Politicians Blame Elon Musk

Street riots that escalated from protests against serious crimes committed by immigrants erupted this week in Belfast, the capital of Northern Ireland. The immediate trigger was a particularly brutal attempted murder allegedly committed by an immigrant from Sudan.

Hadi Alodid, a 30-year-old man from Sudan, attacked his victim with a knife in the Kinnaird Avenue area of north Belfast on Monday evening. Video footage circulating on social media appears to show an exceptionally brutal attack: a dark-skinned man repeatedly stabs his victim in the face and neck. According to some accounts, he even attempted to decapitate him. The video also shows several bystanders intervening, pushing the attacker away and restraining him until police arrived.

The victim, Stephen Olgivie, suffered very serious injuries, lost his left eye, and remained in critical condition in hospital.

Alodid appeared in court on Wednesday, where he was charged with attempted murder and denied bail.

Alodid, who is of Sudanese origin, is a recent immigrant to Northern Ireland. He arrived in February 2023 after flying from Paris to Dublin. Upon arrival, he applied for asylum and, in September 2023, was granted permission to remain in the United Kingdom until 2028.

Mass immigration and its associated costs to taxpayers – many asylum seekers are housed in hotels funded by the state – are already pressing issues in the United Kingdom. Crime statistics have also drawn attention to concerns regarding immigrant crime, particularly violent offenses and sexual assaults.

In this social and political context, it is not surprising that the brutal attempted murder committed by Alodidi sparked another wave of anti-immigration protests. By the evening and into the night, however, the demonstrations escalated into riots. Hotels housing asylum seekers were reportedly targeted, although they were protected by police.

This led to clashes between police and protesters. Police deployed rubber bullets and water cannons, while protesters threw objects at officers and set cars on fire.

British politicians have meanwhile found a scapegoat for all of this: once again, it is Elon Musk. On Wednesday, Musk wrote on his social media platform X: “Murderous migrants beheading innocent people in their home town is what’s making people angry, not “social media”!”.

He also reposted a post by another user that stated: “Keir Starmer clearly hates white people.”

“It’s appalling,” Labour Party Chair Anna Turley said of Musk’s interventions, speaking to Britain’s LBC radio station Thursday. “Anyone that is seeking to drive and exploit a situation like this to drive their own political agenda is grievously wrong and doing damage. We’ve seen children, families having to flee their homes on the streets of Belfast last night.” Michelle O’Neill, the first minister of Northern Ireland, had earlier condemned “the Elon Musks of this world,” who she said “are sitting right comfy in their homes, orchestrating hate and tension.”

Starmer did not mention Musk by name, but called out “those who encouraged it, online or elsewhere.” He also criticized people “trying to interfere in our democracy and seeking to stir up division on our streets.”

His official spokesperson added Thursday that the government “will not tolerate platforms being used to spread violence.”

Belfast is already the second major British city this June to witness anti-immigration protests and clashes with police. A similar wave of unrest erupted in Southampton in early June. The protests there were fueled not only by a brutal murder committed by an immigrant but also by the conduct of the police.

Specifically, 23-year-old Vickrum Digwa, who is of Indian origin, stabbed 18-year-old student Henry Nowak in early December last year. According to body-camera footage released during the trial, the police officers who arrived at the scene did not believe Nowak when he said he had been stabbed and could not breathe. Instead of providing assistance, they treated the injured young man as a suspect, arresting and handcuffing him while he lay on the ground.

In doing so, the officers relied solely on claims made by Digwa and his brother that Nowak had previously behaved in a racist manner and that Digwa had therefore been acting in self- The UK police have announced that they are now preparing for summer riots in the wake of the incident.

Share

BP Scraps Net Zero division

BP has pared back its Net Zero division as it pivots back towards oil and gas, GB News reports.

The company has confirmed that it will be split into two divisions – upstream and downstream. It currently operates with three divisions, with one focused on “gas and low carbon energy”. Renewables fall under this division, but will next year come under a separate “Other Businesses” segment.

The shift marks a return to the company structure BP abandoned six years ago, when it attempted to pursue a greener agenda. Then chief executive Bernard Looney introduced the gas and low carbon energy division as part of this green drive. But under current chief executive, Meg O’Neill, BP has rowed back.

The company announced last year that it would be cutting renewable energy investments to focus on increasing oil and gas production.

It had come under increasing pressure from investors unhappy that its profits and share price were lower than its rivals.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

Share

1. George Orwell, writer (1902-1950).

   

2. Thomas Jefferson, 3rd president of the United States (1743-1826).

   

3. Adam Smith, philosopher, and political economist (1723-1790).

• Paris Police Strike After PSG Riots

• UK Police Preparing for Summer of Riots

• Oxford in Fresh Trans Row

Paris Police Strike After PSG Riots

A move that French news outlet Valeurs Actuelles has described as “unheard of,” French police in the 8th arrondissement police station have gone on strike, from the top of the police command to the bottom, Remix News reports. This is no ordinary police precinct either, but in the heart of Paris, right next to the Élysée.

The strike began on June 3 and it involves all branches of the precinct, including the Rescue Police Brigade (BPS), the Territorial Contact Brigade (BTC), via the Anti-Crime Brigade (BAC). That means in this arrondissement, the entire workforce has ceased police operations, apart from acute emergency rescue operations, such as car accidents, a source told Valeurs Actuelles.

The decision comes after two separate issues. One was the conviction of a number of officers, who two weeks ago, were sent to prison. The other has to do with the riots that broke out during the Champions League final on May 30, which saw 890 people arrested, close to 200 officers injured, and two deaths.

Both French police unions, Alliance and Un1té, are standing behind the officers “in the face of this political and judicial abandonment,” wrote Valeurs Actuelles.

UK Police Preparing for Summer of Riots

UK police forces have been placed on alert for a potential “summer of disorder” following widespread public anger over the murder of 18-year-old Henry Nowak and the controversial police response at the scene, The Telegraph reports.

National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) chairman Gavin Stephens has instructed forces in England and Wales to prepare contingency plans – the third consecutive year such measures have been activated amid rising community tensions.

Nowak, a first-year accountancy and finance student at the University of Southampton, was stabbed five times on 3 December 2025 while walking home from a night out. His killer, 23-year-old Vickrum Singh Digwa, used a ceremonial knife and was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years in late May 2026.

The case has provoked intense outrage due to body-worn camera footage showing officers initially believing Digwa’s false claim that Nowak had racially abused him and knocked off his turban. Instead of immediately aiding the victim, officers handcuffed the dying Nowak behind his back as he repeatedly said he had been stabbed and couldn’t breathe. One officer reportedly replied, “I don’t think you have, mate.” Initial police statements appeared to treat Nowak as the aggressor before being revised. Hampshire Police’s Chief Constable has apologised, and the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is investigating the handling of the incident.

The controversy has fuelled protests in Southampton and elsewhere, with accusations of “two-tier policing” and debates over race, knife crime, and public trust in the police.

US Vice President JD Vance publicly blamed the murder on “the politics of self-hatred and the mass invasion of migrants,” prompting UK Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy to call him and state that he was “wrong,” saying the case had “nothing to do with mass migration.”

Tensions have been further heightened by a separate stabbing in Belfast on 8 June 2026. A Sudanese asylum seeker was charged with attempted murder after a brutal knife attack in north Belfast that left a man in his 40s with serious injuries to his face, neck, and back. The incident quickly sparked anti-immigration protests, with vehicles and a bus set on fire and pockets of disorder reported across the city.

As summer approaches, authorities are activating national plans to maintain order while investigations continue.

Oxford in Fresh Trans Row

An Oxford professor has been forced to cancel his lecture series on gender law after disruption from pro-trans rights protesters who branded him a bigot, The Times reports.

Dr Michael Foran, 32, an associate professor of law, said that he had cancelled talks on how sex and gender had affected the law in relation to controversies over single-sex spaces, freedom of expression, privacy, sport and sexual intimacy.

Footage posted online shows how trans activists interrupted two talks Foran gave on this topic. The videos capture the activists – understood to be students at the university – standing in front of his lectern and telling the audience he was bigoted, urging them not to give him a platform.

In a recording of a lecture on May 29, taken by an audience member, one of the protesters claimed that Foran “masks his transphobia behind a thin veneer of academia”.

The protester added: “If you are here in a critical capacity to challenge his ideas … that is not the same as refusing to platform him. He will not be convinced by your arguments. Please join me in walking out and refusing to platform this bigot.”

In a video of the second lecture on June 5, the same two protesters could again be seen addressing the audience at the start of the event. However, on this occasion their voices were largely drowned out by objections to their presence from those attending.

After they left, two more activists hidden in the audience stood up and continued to protest before they were escorted out.

A university source who was present at the lectures but has asked to remain anonymous has revealed that the university proctors’ office gave permission for the protests to go ahead.

The students who attended also confirmed that, although they had made complaints to the proctors about the disruptive and intimidating nature of the demonstration at Foran’s first talk, the officials allowed the activists to protest at a second lecture.

• European Commission: Member States Should End Border Controls

• “Switch Off Your Solar Panels”: Dutch Grid Operator Offers Cash to Households

• China Develops AI to Predict and Preempt Dissidents

European Commission: Member States Should End Border Controls

The European Commission recommends that Member States gradually phase out border controls at the European Union’s internal borders, as these hinder free
movement within the Schengen Area and illegal immigration has decreased. The
recommendation affects those Schengen countries that decided to reinstate
border controls - such as Germany, France, the Netherlands, Austria, Denmark,
Italy, Slovenia, Sweden, and Norway - because they were struggling with high levels of immigration and the threat of terrorism, reports The Brussels Times.

The Commission justifies the recommendation by noting that the EU’s new Asylum and Migration Pact will enter into application in June 2026. Among other things, it will strengthen the protection of the EU’s external borders and provide member states with new tools to combat illegal migration. Magnus Brunner, the EU Commissioner for Home Affairs and Migration, confirmed that the EU has implemented the world’s most advanced border management systems, and therefore Member States can now gradually phase out internal border checks. Brunner also cited data showing that illegal border crossings were 26% lower last year and 40% lower in the first four months of this year.

The Commission further explained that there are far better alternatives to border controls that do not interfere as much with the free movement of people. Examples include random, targeted, or risk-based police checks and mobile technologies that identify individuals biometrically or automatically monitor vehicles.

Germany has announced that, despite the Commission’s recommendation and the decrease in the number of asylum seekers, the country intends to continue with border controls.

All countries that have reinstated border controls are in the Schengen Area, where border controls are generally not in place. Member states are permitted to temporarily reinstate border controls if necessary for reasons of public order or internal security. In such cases, border controls may be reinstated for up to two years, which may be extended in exceptional circumstances.

Share

“Switch Off Your Solar Panels”: Dutch Grid Operator Offers Cash to Households

In the Netherlands, approximately 55,000 households received a letter from grid operator Enexis requesting permission to temporarily turn off residents’ solar panels during sunny periods. The operator will pay households that agree a compensation of €0.25 for every kilowatt-hour not produced, reports AD Nieuws.

The company is inviting residents of the Groningen, Overijssel, North Brabant, and Limburg regions to voluntarily register their solar panels in the Zonnedimmer app. Through this app, Enexis can turn the solar panels on and off and thus limit electricity production. The reason is that during periods of high solar activity, the power grid risks overload, which this measure aims to prevent by stopping home solar panels from feeding electricity into the grid

Enexis explains that a grid overload is particularly likely when many neighbors in the same area generate a massive amount of energy simultaneously. A grid overload can damage cables and lead to prolonged power outages. “To prevent this, we may sometimes have to temporarily shut down a power station as a last resort. You will then be without power for a few hours. With a solution like Zonnedimmer, we can work together to reduce the risk of these problems. This keeps the power grid safe and reliable for you and your neighbors,” the letter states.

When solar panels are turned off, households lose the electricity they generate. The company plans to compensate at €0.25 per kilowatt-hour, which amounts to about 1–2 euros for a typical solar panel owner whose panels are not operating for two hours. Depending on the energy contract, this solution can even be profitable for some customers, as under normal circumstances they might not earn anything (or could even pay extra) during sunny hours.

In the Netherlands, this type of solution has been used before, with payments made to owners of wind turbines and solar farms for shutting down their equipment when electricity production exceeds demand. At the same time, the country is facing grid congestion issues, and many people and businesses remain on waiting lists for grid connections for years.

Subscribe now

China Develops AI to Predict and Preempt Dissidents

A Chinese company is attempting to develop artificial intelligence that uses location data and internet usage to predict who might say or do something critical of the government in the future - in other words, who might become a dissident. With such technology, the trigger for state action would no longer be something a citizen has done, but something the state believes the citizen will do, writes The New York Times.

Currently, Chinese authorities monitor online activity using the Great Firewall, a system developed by Geedge Networks, a surveillance and censorship software. However, according to researchers at the Wicked Problems Lab at Vanderbilt University’s National Security Institute, documents have been leaked from the same company. According to these documents, Geedge is collaborating with a government-funded research unit (MESA Lab) to develop artificial intelligence technology that, by analyzing location data and internet usage, can predict who might do or say something critical of the government. Brett V. Benson, a political science professor at Vanderbilt University, said: “Geedge’s research team was doing more than just documenting behavioral patterns. They were trying to predict what citizens might do next and with whom.”

More specifically, the company plans to link a person’s physical movements with other online activities, including what movies they watched and what books they read. Based on such so-called “ordinary” data, profiles are created, the individual is identified, and the system assesses the likelihood of what the person plans to do next - specifically, whether someone might start criticizing the government. Vanderbilt researchers emphasize that this approach differs from traditional surveillance, which reacts to actions that have already taken place. Predictive systems, by contrast, allow action before anything happens at all, let alone public dissent.

According to Vanderbilt the company’s success appears to have stalled. Specifically, the Biden administration imposed export controls on U.S.-designed computer chips that power artificial intelligence. As a result, Geedge has faced difficulties in securing sufficient computing power, and according to Professor Benson, the company has been using older, less powerful models and chips. These were sufficient for the company’s existing products, but predictive technology requires much more powerful and advanced solutions. Thus, the predictive technology plan is still in the research phase. According to Vanderbilt researchers, it is in any case a frightening solution where an authoritarian regime can suppress dissidents before any “different thoughts” even cross their minds. It is also considered possible that the obstacle caused by U.S. export controls may soon ease. During President Trump’s recent visit to Beijing, U.S. officials stated that China has access to a more advanced version of Nvidia chips.

According to Brett J. Goldstein, director of Vanderbilt’s Wicked Problems Lab, predictive technology emerges when mass surveillance meets artificial intelligence. “Without checks and balances, what China is doing to its own citizens is a preview of what becomes possible anywhere these tools go unchecked,” Goldstein stated.

Finally, researchers at Vanderbilt University noted that the data leak provided a good overview of China’s surveillance architecture. The Chinese Academy of Sciences trains talent and creates commercial enterprises, such as Geedge, which develop the necessary technology and sell it to government agencies. Many of these companies engage in dual business activities, where the line between legitimate business and surveillance systems created for the state is blurred. However, the powerful surveillance systems created by China do not usually remain within China’s borders. According to Geedge’s documents, they are actively exported elsewhere, such as to Myanmar, Pakistan, Ethiopia, and Kazakhstan. This creates a backdoor for Chinese companies to access data collected in other countries if they so desire. Although Geedge’s documents do not demonstrate this potential capability, given China’s past behavior, this is a well-founded concern.

Sunetra Gupta is a professor of infectious diseases at Oxford University, and in Covid years she was one of the original signatories of the Great Barrington declaration that advised focused protection instead of blanket interventions in the society. As a novelist, she is the recipient of the Sahitya Akademi Award, a top recognition in Indian literature. She is also a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature.

Read more about the Great Barrington declaration: https://gbdeclaration.org

Learn more about Sunetra Gupta’s literary career: https://www.sunetragupta.com/

Read excerpts of work by Mathura M Lattik: https://www.lyrikline.org/en/authors/mathura

Share

• Frontex: Illegal Immigration into the EU Has Decreased

• Guterres Says El Niño Is Worse Because of Man-Made Climate Change

• UN Warns Age Verification Threatens Privacy of Children and Adults

Frontex: Illegal Immigration into the EU Has Decreased

According to the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex), 28,500 illegal border crossings into the European Union were recorded in the first four months of 2026. Thus, the number of illegal border crossings has decreased by 40% compared to the same period last year.

The most active migration routes were the Central Mediterranean and Eastern Mediterranean routes, each accounting for about one-third of all illegal entries. In the Central Mediterranean, 46% fewer cases were recorded than last year - approximately 8,500 arrivals - mainly from Bangladesh, Somalia, and Sudan. In the Eastern Mediterranean, approximately 8,400 crossings were recorded, a 32% decrease, with the Libya-Crete corridor being the most active. Libya was the most frequently used departure point, though authorities there implemented preventive measures.

The largest decline was on the Western African route, where detected cases fell by 78%. According to Frontex, this resulted from preventive measures implemented by Mauritania in cooperation with Spain and the EU since spring 2025, and more recently by Senegal and Gambia. The only increase in entries was recorded on the Western Mediterranean migration route, where the number of detected cases rose by half. The main country of departure was Algeria, which, according to Frontex, indicates a shift in smuggling routes as stricter controls in Morocco and on neighboring West African and Central Mediterranean routes have redirected more departures to the Algerian coast.

On the Western Balkans route, where the main point of departure was the border between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, approximately 2,800 cases were recorded, representing a 19% decrease. On the eastern land border, approximately 1,100 cases were recorded, representing a 49% decrease. At the same time, despite a calmer start to the year, migratory pressure from Belarus increased in March. Frontex believes this may have been due to better weather and recent legislative changes that have made it easier to access the border area. At the EU-Ukraine border, however, those crossing were mainly Ukrainian men seeking to avoid military service. Frontex also noted that detected attempts to leave via the English Channel decreased by nearly half, reaching approximately 9,900.

According to Eurostat data, 132,600 third-country citizens were denied entry to the EU in 2025, which is 7.1% more than in 2024 (123,835). The number of persons staying illegally in the EU decreased by 21.7%, from 918,525 in 2024 to 719,395 in 2025. Last year, 491,950 departure orders were issued to third-country nationals, an increase of 5.8% compared to 2024 (464,985). Of the removal orders, 135,460 were enforced, which is 20.9% more than in 2024, when 112,040 were enforced. Germany reported the highest number of returns to third countries (29,295), followed by France (14,940) and Sweden (11,250). Most of those returned came from Turkey (13,405), Georgia (10,475), Syria (8,370), and Albania (8,020).

Frontex’s preliminary aggregate data for 2025 also show a decline in irregular border crossings. There were 26% fewer such crossings last year compared to the year before, or approximately 178,000. This is the lowest level since 2021. Although irregular migration has decreased recently, it remains high, and human trafficking networks continue to send people on dangerous journeys. Therefore, Frontex warns that the situation at Europe’s borders remains uncertain. Migration pressure can quickly shift from one route to another, depending on conflicts, instability, and smuggling networks. Immigration into the European Union may also be affected by the unstable security situation in the Middle East, particularly in Lebanon, from where people may attempt to reach Cyprus and other Mediterranean countries by sea.

According to the Rockwool Foundation, the number of foreign-born residents across Europe increased by approximately 2.1 million in 2025, reaching a total of about 64 million in EU member states. In 2010, there were approximately 40 million foreign-born residents in the EU. The largest increase was recorded in Spain, which received about 1.22 million immigrants, accounting for approximately one-third of the total EU increase. However, the main destination remains Germany, where, according to the Federal Statistical Office, approximately 1.48 million (1.03 million according to Rockwool) foreign-born people arrived last year - a 13% decrease compared to 2024. According to German officials, the decline is due to a lower number of arrivals from the main countries of origin. For example, the net migration of Syrians decreased by 67%, that of Afghans by 41%, and that of Ukrainians by 21%.

In 2025, 669,365 asylum applications were filed in the EU, a decrease of 26.6% compared to 2024. The same countries lead in asylum applications: Spain with approximately 141,000 applications, Italy with approximately 127,000, France with approximately 116,000, and Germany with 113,000. Together, these four countries account for approximately 74% of all asylum applications submitted in the EU. The largest number of applications came from people of Afghan and Syrian origin, accounting for about 42%, followed by Turkey at 11%. Other nationalities, including Somalia, Iraq, Russia, and Eritrea, each account for a relatively small share - around 4% or less. In Spain, however, 60% of applications come from Venezuelan citizens and 11% from Malian citizens. Italy receives the most people from Bangladesh, accounting for about 22% of asylum applications.

Germany leads in terms of the number of people granted refugee status, with approximately 2.7 million refugees. It is followed by Poland with about 1 million refugees and France with approximately 751,000 refugees. Spain has 471,000 refugees and the Czech Republic has 381,000.

At the same time, as of the end of February 2026, 1.20 million asylum applications were pending a decision across the EU. In February last year, 1.25 million applicants were awaiting a decision, which was 4% more than this year. The highest number of pending applications are in Germany (291,245), Spain (251,140), and Italy (approx. 237,485).

Share

UN Guterres Warns: The World Must View The Coming El Niño Phenomenon as a Climate Warning

The UN has joined scientists in warning that an extremely strong El Niño will hit the world this year, causing high temperatures and extreme weather. A new phase of El Niño could begin in just a few weeks, raising temperatures across the globe, with its peak predicted for the end of the year. In this context, the UN noted that this natural phenomenon is being amplified by human-induced climate change and that the only effective response is to implement climate action, reports the BBC.

According to the World Meteorological Organization, El Niño will develop in the middle of the year and is likely to intensify further over the course of the year, affecting temperatures and precipitation patterns and causing much of the extreme weather. National weather services are forecasting one of the strongest on record - a “super El Niño” - and and it is believed that we may see weather conditions unprecedented in recent history.

El Niño occurs when changes in wind patterns allow warmer water to spread across the tropical Pacific Ocean. Sea surface temperatures in the Pacific monitoring region naturally fluctuate above and below average. However, if they warm or cool by more than half a degree from the reference value over a longer period, conditions are favorable for the development of El Niño or its cooler counterpart, La Niña. A warming of more than two degrees indicates a very strong event. There have been only a handful of such events since 1950.

An El Niño event was expected this year in any case, but scientists have now concluded that it could be unusually powerful. Professor Adam Scaife, head of monthly to decadal prediction at the UK Met Office, said: “We’re very confident that there’s a big event coming. It may even be a record event.” In any case, a strong El Niño typically brings hot and dry weather to parts of South America, Southeast Asia, and Australia, increasing the likelihood of droughts and wildfires. At the same time, it may weaken the Indian monsoon and bring drier conditions to the Horn of Africa, but heavier rainfall to the southern United States. There may even be an increased likelihood that the UK will start the winter warmly and end it coldly.

El Niño events typically peak around Christmas. Even if this year’s El Niño does not reach “super” levels, the consequences could still be extreme. In addition to extreme weather and its associated consequences, a strong El Niño has previously caused food price increases and loss of income, as crop failures and trade disruptions ripple through supply chains and economies.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres confirmed the World Meteorological Organization’s forecast in a video message and noted that there is a 90% probability of a strong El Niño. He added that the world must treat this natural phenomenon as a climate warning. Guterres stated: “El Niño conditions will pour fuel on the fire of a warming world. Impacts will hit even harder, travel even farther, and cross borders with devastating speed. The only effective response is climate action equal to the crisis – ending the addiction to fossil fuels, accelerating the shift to renewables, protecting the most vulnerable, and delivering early warning systems for all.”

Subscribe now

UN Warns Age Verification Threatens Privacy of Children and Adults

The UN Human Rights Office has published measures that would help make the internet safer for children. According to UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk, both governments and tech companies should implement stronger measures to make platforms safer for children, including better regulation, oversight, and accountability. However, age verification may not be the best solution; on the contrary, it poses a risk to privacy and may push children into the darker corners of the internet.

“The digital world that connects children to learning, community, and creativity also exposes them to real risks to their safety, privacy, and wellbeing,” said Türk, but such harm is neither natural nor inevitable. “They result from design choices and business practices that undermine safety, including addictive design features, such as infinite scroll, autoplay, and persistent notifications from apps,” Türk explained.

In the Commissioner’s view, child protection online is indeed a priority, but a blanket ban on social media is not the solution. “Simply limiting access to platforms that remain unsafe cannot stand as the endpoint in effectively protecting children. We need much wider action – by Governments and companies – to ensure that the platforms themselves are made safer by design, that data is protected, that those responsible for harm can held to account, and that children’s rights and needs are fully respected throughout,” Türk stated. However, age verification leaves the design and algorithms of platforms unchanged, and it is precisely these that make the platforms dangerous. Therefore, countries should require technology companies to integrate safety into platform design, rather than shifting the burden onto parents and children.

If age restrictions are to be imposed on certain services or content, they should be targeted at clearly defined harms. The UN also recommends other measures that protect children while respecting human rights. For example, age verification must be secure; solutions must be continuously assessed for their impact on children’s rights; and, above all, it is long overdue to involve children and listen to their opinions when drafting rules that affect them. These steps must be supported by transparency, proper oversight, and corporate accountability, and children whose rights have been violated must have access to legal remedies.

In any case, no new rule should cause additional harm, such as that which age verification can entail, thereby jeopardizing the privacy of both children and adults. In conclusion, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights emphasized that while age restrictions are easy for children to circumvent, they may still force children to use riskier and even less monitored platforms.

• EU Parliament’s ESN Party Faces Ban

• Germany: Platforms Must Make “Reliable” News More Visible

• EU Requires New Cars to Monitor Driver Behavior

EU Parliament’s ESN Party Faces Ban

According to the Authority for European Political Parties and Foundations, evidence has been found that casts doubt on whether the Europe of Sovereign Nations (ESN) party adheres to the values of the European Union. If a decision is made, the ESN party could lose its funding and its right to operate as a political party, writes Politico.

The Authority’s director, Pascal Schonard, wrote in a voluminous 300-page document that the ESN party’s compliance with EU values is questionable. The Authority’s task is to ensure that political parties and foundations do not violate EU rules. The rules require that political parties adhere to the Union’s fundamental values, which, under Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, are human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, and respect for human rights, including the rights of minorities.

Schonard claims that ESN members violate these values and that the Authority has evidence in the form of court rulings, screenshots, and social media posts. These are said to demonstrate ESN party members’ anti-immigration stance, anti-Semitism, and criticism of the LGBT community. There are also said to be calls for organized repatriation, and homosexuality is reportedly portrayed as pedophilia.

The authority also accuses national parties belonging to the ESN of wrongdoing. For example, Bulgaria’s Revival is alleged to collaborate with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party and to have organized violent protests in Sofia in February 2025, including an attack on a European Commission delegation. The Alternative for Germany party has not gone unnoticed either; in its case, the Authority highlights the German intelligence service’s May 2025 decision to classify the party as a far-right extremist organization. It also notes the ruling by the Cologne Administrative Court, which blocked the intelligence service’s classification but confirmed that the party’s program is “contrary to human dignity and freedom of religion.”

According to a statement on the ESN party’s website, the party learned of the charges from the media and is awaiting a detailed document from the Authority to understand the specific content of the charges. Once one of the institutions (Parliament, the Council, or the Commission) requests the Authority to launch the formal verification procedure, ESN has the right to propose mitigating measures. Before a final decision is made on whether to ban the party, a committee of independent eminent persons - whose members are appointed by the European Parliament, the Council, and the Commission (two members from each) - must also provide an assessment.

The ESN party, which has 27 members from the European Parliament, is a separate legal entity from the ESN group. Groups are parliamentary groups, while parties are broader alliances of national parties funded by the EU budget. However, the current accusation does not threaten the ESN group with any penalties; but if the ESN party were banned, its members would lose political support and coordination. Both the ESN party and the ESN group were founded in 2024 by the German right-wing party Alternative for Germany (AfD). In addition to the AfD, the ESN party includes Bulgaria’s Revival, France’s Reconquest, the Polish Confederation, the Czech SPD, Hungary’s Our Homeland Movement, the Netherlands’ Forum for Democracy, and the Slovak Republic Movement. In 2026, the party applied for more than 2 million euros in operational funding.

Share

Germany: Platforms Must Make “Reliable” News More Visible

A document leaked to German media outlines a plan to require social media platforms such as X, Facebook, and TikTok to make channels approved by a government and deemed “reliable” more visible in their news feeds. “Reliability” would be determined by individuals appointed by the politicians currently in power, according to Reclaim The Net.

Germany’s media organizations have received the “public value” designation since 2025. Media outlets with this designation, such as ARD and ZDF, already appear at the top of app stores and smart TV app lists. The “public value” designations are awarded by the Licensing and Supervisory Commission (ZAK), which includes heads of media authorities from the 14 federal states, appointed by state governments. Politicians in power thus indirectly decide who gets the designation and designated media outlets must display a “public value” label.

But a new proposal titled “Paper on the Further Development of Public Value” aims to extend this system to social media news feeds. The document warns that algorithms can be dominated by disinformation, polarizing, or attention-grabbing content. To promote “reliable” material, it proposes legally requiring platforms to adjust their algorithms so that “public value”-tagged stories are prioritized. It even suggests a quota for approved content in news feeds.

According to Thorsten Schmiege, head of Germany’s Landesmedienanstalten and president of the Bavarian Media Authority, the states plan to present the first draft of the Digital Media State Treaty as early as this summer. If enacted, “reliable” information and “public value” content would appear prominently in users’ news feeds across major platforms. At the same time, media authorities could more easily penalize outlets for “inappropriate” content, as seen in past cases. For example, the Berlin-Brandenburg Media Authority fined the right-wing outlet Nius over a refugee article, and independent journalist Alexander Wallasch was ordered to delete three articles and review past publications. Critics fear the law would force editorial teams to constantly consider regulatory approval when publishing.

Subscribe now

EU Requires New Cars to Monitor Driver Behavior

The European Union’s GSR2 safety regulation continues to require new mandatory driver assistance systems and safety technologies in new cars. The latest is the Advanced Driver Distraction Warning (ADDW), which uses an infrared camera mounted on the steering column, dashboard, or near the interior mirror to continuously monitor the driver’s gaze and head position. According to sources such as Autonext, this system must be installed in all newly registered cars starting in July 2026. However, this is no longer just a background assistance system. It constantly checks to ensure the driver’s gaze remains focused on the road ahead. If the system detects that the driver is looking away for too long, it triggers a warning - either an audible alert, a visual alert on the dashboard, or both.

Gocar.be tested one such system in an Xpeng P7+. The conclusion was not very flattering. While the main issue was not the system itself, it became intrusive very quickly. According to the test, even a glance at the screen, out the side window, or a quick peek at the backseat was enough to trigger a warning. The repeated beeps turned into a major distraction rather than the calm safety measure promised.

Each automaker can configure ADDW differently. Some versions are quite understanding, while others are extremely aggressive to meet EU rules. In everyday use, this difference matters most. Automotive experts believe the best systems can detect genuine distraction, act decisively when needed, and remain completely unnoticeable the rest of the time. Poor systems, however, function as yet another beeping machine configured to be extremely aggressive and sensitive - a digital babysitter that penalizes every glance away from the road and that drivers try to disable one way or another. Moreover, it may not be easy or even possible to turn the system off: in the Gocar.be test, Xpeng’s so-called “turned-off” attention monitoring reactivated when it detected problematic behavior.

Automotive experts also highlight privacy concerns. The system’s data should only be processed within the vehicle; it is not supposed to be stored or transmitted elsewhere. However, given car manufacturers’ history with data collection, there are reasons to doubt this assurance.

In addition to ADDW, other new requirements apply to all newly registered cars in Europe from July 2026. These include adaptive emergency brake lights, an alcohol interlock preparation (or system in some cases), and an event data recorder (“black box”). The goal is noble — to make traffic safer and reduce accidents. However, decision-makers apparently fail to see the danger in pushing a driver to the limit with constant ADDW beeping sounds.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

1. Lord Acton, historian, and politician (1834-1902)

   

2. Friedrich August von Hayek, economist and philosopher (1899-1992)

   

3. Confucius, philosopher (c. 551 – c. 479 BCE)

   

• Guilty of Hate Speech for Citing Immigration Crime Stats

• Russia Bolsters Surveillance with State Messaging App Max

• UK: Work Should Be Banned During Heat Waves

Guilty of Hate Speech for Citing Immigration Crime Stats

In Belgium, former Member of Parliament Dries Van Langenhove was convicted of hate speech after a 2024 lecture in which he presented facts on the consequences of mass immigration, including statistics on crime, housing shortages, and other social problems, reports The Noticer.

In the lecture, the right-wing activist discussed immigration issues, such as the “great replacement theory” and multiculturalism. Van Langenhove described how high levels of immigration contribute to crime and housing shortages. He also highlighted other social problems, including declining academic standards in schools, overcrowded prisons, and an overburdened social security system. He argued that inequality stems more from group differences than from structural racism. “People are not equal, animals are not equal, plants are not equal, there is nothing in nature that is equal,” he argued.

Because of this lecture, the Correctional Court of First Instance in Leuven found Van Langenhove guilty of hate speech. He was also convicted of inciting violence on the basis of nationality, race, skin color, origin, or affiliation, and of spreading ideas of racial supremacy or racial hatred. The judges noted that while freedom of speech is protected to a certain extent in Europe, Van Langenhove’s lecture crossed into criminal territory. In their view, it is not necessary for others to commit a punishable offense; it is sufficient that they are enticed to adopt an intolerant attitude toward a particular group. The court found that he intentionally incited hatred and criticized him for using remarks intended to absolve himself of responsibility. His overall message was deemed to shift blame for social problems onto certain groups and promote group hierarchy.

Van Langenhove commented on the verdict on X, noting that the judges seemed disappointed they could not impose a prison sentence. He asserted that all allegations against him were based on statistics and science. However, the judge stated: “Even if all of the statements made by Van Langenhove are based on scientific evidence and statistics, it makes no difference to the criminal intent. Van Langenhove is not charged with spreading false information. He is charged with presenting facts in a way that incites hatred against persons on the grounds of one or more of the protected criteria in the Anti-Racism Law.” But in Van Langenhove’s view, neither the prosecutor nor the judge presented evidence of how or against whom he had incited hatred. The main argument was that he had created a “hostile atmosphere of us versus them” toward immigrants. However, according to Van Langenhove, this is not true, as he does not view immigrants as enemies but rather blames those who organized and permitted mass immigration.

Previously, Dries Van Langenhove received a one-year prison sentence (largely suspended) for “offensive” memes posted by others in a private group chat. This led to a 10-year ban on running for parliament after appeals. He was also fined 4,000 euros in a separate equality complaint related to a lecture at a Catholic university.

Share

Russia Bolsters Surveillance with State Messaging App Max

Russia’s state-sanctioned messaging app Max has been viewed as a surveillance tool from day one and is considered unreliable, even dangerous. Now, IT specialists have discovered several new features that enhance surveillance. At the same time, users can be forced to update the app, with each update bringing new surveillance tools and security vulnerabilities, writes Meduza.

A user of the IT site Habr published an analysis of the Android app Max by reverse engineering its APK file. The author confirmed that the app contains built-in tracking mechanisms and other user-unfriendly features. For example, Max collects and sends information about apps downloaded to the device to VK servers and checks for the presence of a VPN. Furthermore, a server command can block the device’s use until the VPN is turned off. In addition, Max monitors the user’s address book and changes to contacts, sending this information to VK servers.

The author also discovered several previously unknown features. For example, the app allows disabling messaging service encryption with a single command. Another feature is a forced update, where the app displays a notification: “You cannot write or call in this version” along with an update button. The button takes the user to download.max.ru, meaning the update comes directly from the app’s server, not through the Google Play Store. This makes Max resistant to blocking: if Russia restricts Google’s services or if Google does so in Russia, the new version would still reach users.

It also turned out that it is possible to disable TLS security checks in Max via a server command. In that case, the app no longer verifies whether the connection to the server is secure, leaving the user vulnerable to attacks. Anyone who controls the network - such as Roskomnadzor via Russia’s internet traffic filtering system (TSPU) or a mobile operator - could potentially read messages, files, and even passwords.

In addition, the author discovered that the version of Max he examined included a neural network for real-time speech recognition. It was capable of identifying the speaker by voice, detecting specific keywords, and generating transcripts. When the first reports emerged, VK explained that Max’s speech technology uses machine learning to analyze connections and adjust parameters. In the version released in May, the neural network feature for speech recognition has been removed, but the technical capability to add it back apparently remains.

Russian authorities have done everything possible to push users toward Max and away from Telegram and other apps. Telegram is largely blocked in Russia, though not directly banned, and can be used with VPN workarounds. It is therefore not surprising that Max is gradually displacing Telegram. However, this is rarely due to voluntary preference. Users are often forced to adopt Max through pressure from authorities and employers, as well as requirements from government services, education, finance, healthcare, and even transportation.

Subscribe now

UK: Work Should Be Banned During Heat Waves

The UK’s influential Climate Change Committee (CCC) is recommending measures that would allow people to stop working during heat waves. According to Environment Secretary Emma Reynolds, the government is carefully considering the proposal, which would require companies to allow employees to take time off during extreme heat, according to The Telegraph.

The Climate Change Committee issued this recommendation on temperature limits in a new report advising ministers on how to cope with climate change. Among other things, it includes measures to protect people from increasing heat, floods, and droughts. While air conditioning in public buildings is recommended, one of the main proposals is a maximum working temperature

According to the CCC, a maximum working temperature would help reduce health risks to employees caused by high temperatures and encourage employers to invest more in cooling systems. “Businesses are largely responsible for investing in their own adaptations but must ensure that workplaces and working practices are safe for employees, including for those working outside,” the report states. As examples, it highlights Spain, where the maximum permitted indoor temperature is 27 °C for sedentary work and 25 °C for light physical work.

The CCC also warned that by 2050, significantly warmer summers are predicted, with temperatures in southern England potentially consistently exceeding 40 °C and occasionally reaching as high as 45 °C. At the same time, heat waves in the UK will become more frequent and last longer.

In addition, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is working on heatwave contingency plans, but the agency is not expected to set a maximum temperature by law. However, the agency plans to update the Code of Practice on Working Conditions, first approved in 1992, and has stated that the safe minimum temperature should be 13 °C for heavy physical work and 16 °C for light physical work.

However, it is the unions that have fought hardest for a maximum working temperature. One concluded that even the current recommendations of the CCC regarding maximum temperatures are insufficient and that people working outdoors should also be included. According to another union, the maximum working temperature should be 25 °C, as “scorching heat” can be life-threatening.

At the same time, several other “key” organizations have also actively put climate change back on the agenda. For example, the WHO European Commission on Climate and Health asked the WHO to declare a climate health emergency. The UN General Assembly, however, endorsed an international court ruling stating that climate action is a legal obligation for nations, not a political choice. None of them, however, seem to be taking into account a recently published article in which even the so-called mainstream of climate science has largely abandoned the most extreme climate scenario, according to which the world was supposed to warm by 4–5 °C by 2100, which in turn was supposed to lead to catastrophe. Now, however, based on current trends, scientists have concluded that such a sudden and extreme climate change is not on the horizon, and thus a climate catastrophe of that scale will not occur. Many scientists have been explaining this more realistic view for years, adding that the role of CO2 and the use of fossil fuels as causes of climate change is either marginal or insignificant.

• WHO Commission: Climate Crisis Is a Health Crisis

• UNICEF: Online Age Verification Creates a False Sense of Security

• Merkel: Social Media Must Be Censored

WHO Commission: Climate Crisis Is a Health Crisis

The Pan-European Commission on Climate and Health (PECCH) is calling on the World Health Organization (WHO) to “declare climate change a public health emergency of international concern.” The Commission believes that climate change is no longer a future environmental threat but rather an immediate and deepening crisis. This crisis is already affecting people’s health, food, water, energy, and security. Yet governments are not responding at the necessary level or with measures proportionate to the gravity of the situation, writes WHO.

The Commission on Climate and Health, chaired by Iceland’s former Prime Minister Katrín Jakobsdóttir and comprising ministers, former heads of government, and representatives of key organizations from 53 countries, has therefore presented the WHO with 17 recommendations on what governments should do next. “The climate crisis is a threat to our safety and security, social cohesion, human rights, and health,” noted Commission Chair Jakobsdóttir, adding: “Far from being a problem solely for future generations, it is a real and present threat to us right now in Europe. Climate action is not merely a necessity. It is a high-return investment for a more just and resilient society. We all have a political and moral responsibility to act now.”

Among the Commission’s proposals are recommendations to treat climate change as a health security threat, make health systems more climate-resilient, scale up local action, and reform financial systems that continue to support fossil fuel use. The Commission calls on the WHO to designate climate change as “a public health emergency of international concern.” This is the highest level of health alert, as used, for example, during the COVID-19 crisis. In this way, the Commission hopes to trigger an international response to climate threats, including extreme heat, infectious diseases, food security, and air pollution.

One of the Commission’s main concerns is dependence on fossil fuels. Burning fossil fuels causes air pollution, climate change, and energy crises, which is why the Commission warns that oil and gas subsidies increase public health risks. However, if revenues from taxes were invested in wind and solar farms, public transportation, nutrition, and climate-resilient healthcare, it would save lives and reduce long-term costs.

In addition to calling for a phase-out of fossil fuels, the Commission argues that climate and health should be added to the agendas of national security councils, covering defense, energy, and finance ministries. The Commission appeals to the nations’ conscience, emphasizing that the geopolitical situation has led countries to spend increasingly more on security. Yet “climate change is itself a primary security risk; one that is already disrupting infrastructure, health systems and food and water security across the region, and one whose costs will compound with every year of delayed action.”

Therefore, the Commission finds that current international rules were designed for epidemics and are not suited for a climate health crisis, nor do they account for its scale. Since the WHO has not declared an official emergency, governments can treat climate change as a background factor rather than an acute and escalating threat. In this regard, the World Health Organization appears to largely agree, as Dr. Hans Henri P. Kluge, Regional Director for Europe, stated: “The case for acting on climate now is not just environmental. It is a security argument, a health argument, and an economic argument, all at once. And it is a moral imperative.”

At the same time, even the so-called mainstream of climate science has moved away from the most extreme climate scenario, according to which the world was supposed to warm by 4–5°C by 2100, leading to catastrophe. In other words, the abrupt climate change and impending catastrophe that were previously often highlighted in high-end projections are now considered less likely under updated scenarios.

Share

UNICEF: Online Age Verification Creates a False Sense of Security

According to the children’s organization UNICEF, setting an age limit for online access does not effectively protect children from online risks, and it is not possible to
define a single “right age” for participating online, writes EU Perspectives.

Afrooz Kaviani Johnson, a child protection specialist at the organization, explained: “Evidence shows that risks and opportunities are shaped by factors such as digital literacy, parental support, and platform design — not age alone.” Moreover, older adolescents, rather than younger children, are more likely to encounter harmful content and exploitation. Children’s abilities also vary greatly even within the same age group. Therefore, Johnson warns that age restrictions can create a false sense of security. Instead of age limits and controls, what is needed is a safer digital environment for all children, including stronger protective measures on platforms, digital literacy programs, and greater accountability from technology companies.

UNICEF and Interpol’s studies confirm that social media platforms “remain a primary setting that facilitates online sexual abuse, by a significant margin, compared to other platforms.” New technologies, such as artificial intelligence, chatbots, and nudify apps, also pose risks of privacy breaches, manipulation, and exploitation, yet existing rules rarely apply to them. UNICEF data also confirms that harmful online experiences can lead to psychological consequences. A UNICEF report covering 21 countries found that children who have experienced sexual abuse or bullying online have higher levels of anxiety, more suicidal thoughts, and are more likely to self-harm.

Despite this, UNICEF emphasizes that social media is not uniformly harmful and that blanket restrictions are not the best solution. “For many children, social media provides support and connection,” said Johnson, adding: “For those who are isolated or marginalized, social media isn’t a luxury – it’s a lifeline.” For some young people, limited exposure to harmful content may improve their mental health, but for others, a sudden loss of connection can cause stress and isolation.

Furthermore, experts believe that age restrictions may shift responsibility from platforms to families and authorities, while failing to address harmful design. According to UNICEF, parents cannot fill this gap alone. Thus, UNICEF calls on governments to fulfill their fundamental obligation: “[R]edesigning platforms and policies around children’s rights and safety, and deploying rights-respecting age-assurance tools.”

The ECLAG (European Child Sexual Abuse Legislation Advocacy Group) shares a similar view, arguing that children’s rights must be placed at the center of discussions about children and their digital space. This includes the rights to safety, participation, inclusion, access to information, and privacy. However, current social media bans threaten to undermine all of these rights. Such plans conflate protection with restrictions. Instead of attempting to regulate children’s behaviour, the focus should be on the platforms and on seeking technologically neutral legislation.

Subscribe now

Merkel: Social Media Must Be Censored

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel delivered a speech at the award ceremony of the European Order of Merit on Tuesday. She urged the European Union to vigorously regulate social media and artificial intelligence. “To believe that responsibility for spreading information is no longer necessary, that accountability – there should be no accountability for lies – would undermine democracy,” Merkel said, according to the news portal Reclaim The Net.

In her speech, Angela Merkel warned that unregulated social media and artificial intelligence, along with misinformation and online lies, could threaten democracy by blurring the lines between truth and fiction. According to Merkel, social media creates an environment where “truth can be told as lies and lies can be told as truth.” This, in turn, threatens the information landscape across Europe, and artificial intelligence amplifies the problem. Therefore, Merkel called on the European Union to regulate social media – or rather, what social media should be – and artificial intelligence even more strictly. Merkel acknowledged that mistakes are indeed possible in this process, but that lessons will certainly be learned from them. In closing, she stated: “We’ve had 75 years of European thought. Peace, prosperity, and democracy.”

It is worth noting that it was Angela Merkel’s government that passed Germany’s NetzDG law in 2017. Under the law, platforms are required to remove “clearly illegal” content within 24 hours or face a fine of up to 50 million euros. But now, both opposition politicians and an increasing number of ordinary citizens have felt the law’s heavy hand (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here). By now, many other countries have followed the example of the NetzDG, such as Russia and Turkey, which have created their own definitions of “illegal” content.

The European Union has also built upon the concept created in Germany under Merkel’s leadership with its Digital Services Act (DSA). According to the DSA, large online platforms must assess and mitigate “systemic risks,” including curtailing the dissemination and visibility of information that is deemed to be hate speech or disinformation. The Committee on the Judiciary of the U.S. House of Representatives has called the DSA a sweeping censorship law.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

1. John F. Kennedy, 35th president of the United States (1917-1963)

   

2. Thomas Jefferson, 3rd president of the United States (1743-1826)

   

3. Thomas Sowell, economist and historian (1930)

   

• Musk Yields to UK’s Ofcom Pressure

• Scientists: World Not Ending from Climate Change

• Data Center Boom Throws Climate Goals Overboard

Musk Surrenders to UK’s Ofcom

X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, has agreed to process content
identified as illegal hate speech under the UK’s Online Safety Act within 48
hours. In doing so, X has yielded to the demands of the UK’s communications regulator, Ofcom, writes Reclaim The Net.

According to Ofcom’s statement, the platform pledged to “review and assess UK suspected illegal terrorist and hate content reported through its dedicated UK illegal content reporting tool on average within 24 hours of it being reported, to be calculated as a mean. As a backstop, it will review and assess at least 85% of UK suspected illegal terrorist and hate content reported through its dedicated UK illegal content reporting tool within a maximum of 48 hours.” In other words, X will now review and assess content in the UK that has been reported via its illegal content reporting tool and flagged as illegal - that is, hateful or terrorist in nature.

This represents a significant about-face for X. As recently as last August, the platform warned about the dangers of excessive oversight and stated: “When lawmakers approved these measures, they made a conscientious decision to increase censorship in the name of “online safety””. It appears that X has backtracked on its previous stance.

In addition to speeding up content moderation, X has made other commitments. For example, X has agreed to block access to accounts in the UK if they are reported for posting terrorist content and it is determined that the account belongs to a terrorist organization or is managed by such an entity. X has also agreed to share quarterly performance data with Ofcom so that the regulatory authority can verify compliance with the requirements.

Moreover, X confirmed that it will be “engaging with experts regarding reporting systems for illegal hate and terror content”. This comes after reports that some organizations frequently submitting illegal hate speech or terrorist content to X did not know whether their complaints had been received or whether any action had been taken.

It is worth noting that these “specialists,” with whom X will be “engaging”, appear to be the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), according to Ofcom’s press release. This is the organization with which Ofcom collaborated to gather evidence of suspected illegal terrorist content and hate speech online, including evidence against X. The CCDH is a pro-censorship advocacy group founded in 2018 by Imran Ahmed and Morgan McSweeney, who is now Chief of Staff to Prime Minister Keir Starmer. McSweeney has previously stated that while working at the CCDH, his goal was to “kill Musk’s Twitter”. As for Imran Ahmed, the U.S. State Department has imposed visa restrictions on him because his organization, the CCDH, has sought to force U.S. platforms to censor, demonetize, and suppress American viewpoints

Oliver Griffiths, director of Ofcom’s online safety unit, called the current agreement extremely necessary and added: “We have evidence that terrorist content and illegal hate speech is persisting on some of the largest social media sites.” Griffiths explained that Ofcom is requiring these sites to address the problem with specific measures.

Critics note that it is significant that the reporting tool directs content directly into X’s moderation queue. However, the obligation to review a massive volume - 85% of flagged content - within 24 to 48 hours means that the platform will probably feel pressured to delete such content regardless of whether it is actually hateful or terrorist in nature. Critics also note that Ofcom’s message is clear: sites must agree to the agency’s terms, adhere to its timeline, and use the agency’s preferred partners as gatekeepers, or face investigation, colossal fines, and ultimately even shutdown.

Share

Scientists: World Not Ending from Climate Change

ScenarioMIP climate scientists examined climate change scenarios, including the previously “hottest” one - according to which the world had been expected to warm by about 4–5 °C by 2100, potentially leading to a climate catastrophe. The researchers have now concluded that the world is not facing an apocalypse due to climate change. On the contrary, the “hottest” scenario is unlikely in light of current trends, and other projections should be preferred, according to the NY Post.

This most dire prediction has served as the basis for numerous analyses predicting catastrophic consequences from burning fossil fuels and rising greenhouse gas emissions. For example, models predicted sharp sea-level rise, massive crop losses, rapid glacier melt, and more. This, in turn, led activists to fear widespread die-offs and to push for action in response.

In a study published in the journal Geoscientific Model Development, researchers examined several emissions scenarios and proposed seven alternatives to the most dire one. The researchers wrote: “For the 21st century, this range will be smaller than previously assessed: at the high end of the range, the CMIP6 high emission levels (quantified by SSP5-8.5) have become implausible, based on trends in the costs of renewables, the emergence of climate policy, and recent emission trends (Hausfather and Peters, 2020). At the low end, many CMIP6 emission trajectories have become inconsistent with observed trends during the 2020–2030 period.” In other words, the worst-case high-emission scenario has become unlikely. However, it could still re-emerge if there is a political, technological, or structural deviation from current trends.

Detlef van Vuuren, a senior researcher at the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and lead author of the study, added a caution: even the new climate scenario offers no cause for celebration. “That [3.5°C] would still be a very much worst-case scenario with considerable climate impacts,” said van Vuuren.

Critics of alarmist climate narratives have long pointed out that initial estimates were exaggerated and that some climate models overestimate global warming. In their view, the impact of human activity on the climate is much smaller than often predicted - or even marginal - and extreme forecasts are unlikely (see also here, here, here, here,here, here, here, here, here, here, here).

Subscribe now

Data Center Boom Throws Climate Goals Overboard

In the United Kingdom, more than 100 new data centers have applied to connect to the gas grid to generate their electricity using natural gas. These requests total over 15 TWh per year and appear to ignore the country’s climate goals, writes The Guardian.

British officials note that data center connections to the national power grid have been delayed for years, with consequences now evident. There are around 100 GW of data center projects in the pipeline, and it is unlikely all can be connected. Developers must then find alternative methods.

Silvia Simon, research director at Future Energy Networks (which represents UK natural gas suppliers), said data center operators have submitted more than 100 applications to connect to the gas grid over the past two years. These requests total more than 15 TWh per year - equivalent to London’s consumption over four and a half months. “Not just for resilience, but for primary supply. So this is already an indication that they’re really struggling to get through to the electricity networks,” she added.

In the United States, many data centers rely on gas-fired power. Activists in Tennessee have opposed Elon Musk’s xAI supercluster, which uses dozens of methane-powered generators that they say endanger local health. Reports claim that 11 data centers operated by Meta, OpenAI, xAI, and Microsoft produce more CO₂ than the entire country of Morocco. Meanwhile, U.S. tech companies have lobbied in the EU to limit transparency on data center emissions.

The UK appears headed toward a future similar to the US as gas-dependent data center projects proliferate. Although gas was previously seen as a temporary bridge - avoided for its CO₂ emissions, permitting issues, and land-use impacts - developers are increasingly turning to fossil fuels. At the same time, developers and authorities appear to have softened their stance and are now more willing to consider fossil fuels to meet the country’s ambitious artificial intelligence goals, even at the cost of hundreds of billions.

However, expanding the gas network risks undermining the UK’s climate goals (Clean Power 2030), which call for the power system to run on less than 5% unabated gas-fired generation.

More specifically, Dr. Ana Szarfman identified many new side effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines after analysing reports registered in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), using a new data mining method. Most of the side effects she found had not been detected by the FDA’s previous method, as that method is limited by the fact that a single very common report in the data makes it harder to identify other signals. Dr. Szarfman was able to overcome this limitation, identifying approximately 49 examples of extreme masking and approximately 25 statistically significant safety signals, including sudden cardiac death, Bell’s palsy, and pulmonary infarction.

Dr. Szarfman first reported these findings to FDA vaccine safety officials as early as April 2021, and after discovering even more safety signals, she repeatedly reported those as well. Among these statistically significant safety signals with higher values for adverse events were, for example, acute myocardial infarction, death, and sudden death associated with the Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines; non-site-specific embolism and thrombosis associated with the Janssen and Pfizer vaccines; and dementia associated with the Pfizer vaccine.

However, senior vaccine safety officials at the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CDER) ignored Dr. Szarfman’s information and were instead concerned about the doctor’s own actions. CDER officials asked Dr. Szarfman to halt the data mining and wait before submitting her analysis reports. Ultimately, Dr. Peter Marks, who was then the head of CDER and an enthusiastic supporter of COVID-19 vaccines, wrote that Dr. Szarfman’s data mining could “create erroneous conflicts that feed in to anti-vaccination rhetoric.” Dr. Marks found that Ana Szarfman’s work had “become a major distraction.” Dr. Peter Stein, then director of the CDER’s New Drugs Division, informed Dr. Marks that he had “made it clear” to Dr. Szarfman “that she should not be discussing or providing internal analyses externally, and needs to focus on her assigned work.”

Subscribe now

Despite the prohibitions and warnings, Dr. Szarfman continued her work and defended her method that revealed far greater risks compared to the ongoing method and took a closer view of the pandemic situation. In 2022, Dr. Szarfman co-authored an article in the journal Drug Safety, which found that COVID-19 vaccines have approximately eight times the likelihood of disproportionality signals being masked, compared to other vaccines. In other words, the researchers found that masking occurs when signals from the vaccine in question are overshadowed by those of other vaccines. This, in turn, limits or delays the ability to detect risks associated with new vaccines. While the article did spark interest among CDER officials, it was viewed in a negative and problematic light.

Medical scientist David Wiseman reached a similar conclusion regarding masking, in an article published in a September 2025 preprint. In his assessment, conventional data mining carries a risk of masking, which led to an underestimation of the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines. Wiseman noted that “FDA’s analysis neglected to correct for masking, where signals for one vaccine are concealed by signals from other vaccines.” Senator Johnson has described how, if reports of a certain side effect are so widespread, the safety signal may still exceed the statistical threshold of the FDA’s data mining. For example, statistically significant safety signals for ischemic stroke emerged in individuals aged 65 and older following the Pfizer-BioNTech bivalent booster vaccine. Similarly, signs of myopericarditis were identified in May 2021 in the 16–17 and 18–24 age groups.

In any case, a committee of inquiry led by U.S. Senator Ron Johnson concluded that FDA officials decided to block Dr. Ana Szarfman’s data mining of COVID-19 vaccines and the dissemination of her analyses. Instead of taking the doctor’s reports seriously and further investigating the warning signs, all of her efforts were swept under the carpet. The FDA did not implement any changes or inform the public about the safety signals of the COVID-19 vaccines. Simply put, Senator Johnson’s report finds that the priority of U.S. health agencies was not the actual consequences and side-effects of the vaccines. For the agencies and high-ranking officials, it seemed far more important to avoid fuelling “anti-vaccine” sentiments and to suppress facts that did not align with the narrative approved by the authorities at the time.

• CIA Official: Fauci Influenced COVID-19 Origins Investigation

• Cars Are Spying on Drivers

• Sweden Fights Crime: Tracking Devices for Children

CIA Official: Fauci Influenced Coronavirus Origins Investigation

On Wednesday, CIA officer James Erdman III testified before a U.S. Senate committee, stating that Dr. Anthony Fauci influenced intelligence analyses regarding the origin of the coronavirus. The goal was to downplay conclusions that the virus likely escaped from a lab in Wuhan, reports the New York Post.

James Erdman III, a Special Operations Officer who has worked for the CIA since 2013, analysed the investigations conducted by intelligence agencies into the origins of the coronavirus. Erdman stated that Fauci, then director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), intervened in the work of intelligence agencies on two occasions – February 3, 2020, and June 4, 2021 – with the aim of promoting the “natural origin narrative.” The CIA official noted that while the NIAID director publicly denied having expertise on the coronavirus, he nevertheless sought to steer the investigation behind the scenes.

Erdman also stated that Fauci provided the intelligence community (IC) with a list of vetted specialists, health officials, and scientists. The list included several scientists who participated in a February 2020 conference that resulted in the infamous scientific article “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” which asserted that “SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.”

Thus, according to Erdman, Dr. Fauci’s role in concealing the origin of the coronavirus was deliberate. He added: “The CIA and DNI analytic managers responsible for examining the origin of COVID made decisions inconsistent with the conclusions of subject matter experts and analytical tradecraft, consistently favoring the theory of zoonosis or natural origin.” Moreover, as recently as 2023, the CIA refused to assess whether the pandemic began with a lab leak or was transmitted from animal to human, and concluded that the origin of the coronavirus may never be precisely determined.

James Erdman III testified before the Senate after receiving a subpoena from the Homeland Security Committee. His employer, of course, did not want him to testify. After the hearing, a CIA spokesperson Liz Lyons criticized Senator Rand Paul – who is largely behind the current proceedings – for engaging in “political theater”. Especially, considering that the CIA had already acknowledged last year that a lab leak was the most likely source of the coronavirus. In any case, CIA spokesperson Lyons argued that the Senate committee was acting in bad faith and had summoned the official to testify without notifying the CIA. Thus, in the CIA’s view, witness Erdman was not there for the sake of truth, but solely because of Rand Paul’s subpoena.

Senator Rand Paul wrote on social media platform X that Erdman’s testimony confirms claims that officials deliberately misled Americans regarding the origins of the coronavirus. However, taxpayer funds were used to finance dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, which Fauci consistently denied. Erdman’s testimony demonstrates the extent to which efforts were made to suppress and conceal dissenting views within intelligence agencies and keep the public in the dark. In conclusion, Rand Paul believes that President Biden’s preemptive pardon of Fauci may not be lawful. This should now be clarified in court, and he vowed to continue the fight.

Share

Cars Are Spying on Drivers

Today’s cars are technologically complex, with numerous cameras and sensors in their interiors that connect to the internet and collect far more data on passengers than one might expect. However, this data has become a lucrative commodity for both car manufacturers and third-party apps, writes the BBC.

Car manufacturers’ privacy policies state that they may collect location data, destinations, information about passengers, seatbelt usage, speed, braking frequency, and even what is playing on the radio. Some may even collect details such as a driver’s weight, age, race, and facial expressions. Insurance companies, for example, are eager to purchase this information to help determine an individual’s insurance premium. Yet, in most cases, it is unclear with whom the data is shared. Only a few car manufacturers have admitted that the data is for sale, but even they face no obligation to disclose the buyer.

Consulting firm McKinsey found that about 50% of the cars on the road in 2021 were connected to the internet. McKinsey predicts that by 2030, around 95% of new vehicles sold will be connected. Mozilla, the creator of the Firefox browser, analysed the privacy policies of 25 car brands in 2023 and concluded that cars are “the worst product category we’ve ever evaluated for privacy.” According to the report, automakers reserve the right to collect data including the driver’s name, age, race, weight, financial information, facial expressions, and more. Mozilla also found that 19 of the 25 automakers may sell this data. For example, Kia USA’s privacy policy states that the company may collect data on the car owner’s health, marital status, and other assets, as well as information on products purchased and consumption patterns. According to a Kia spokesperson, the company has never actually collected data on a driver’s health or sexual orientation. These items are reportedly included only because they are listed in California’s “sensitive data” provisions.

So far, there are only a few isolated cases where any measures have been undertaken in regard to such data collection. For example, General Motors has been accused of selling location data without proper permission and has faced significant penalties and restrictions. General Motors is now banned from selling certain vehicle data for five years. However, authorities do not seem particularly eager to broadly restrict data collection by cars. On the contrary, the U.S., for example, is prepared to use federal law to increase the amount of data a car can collect. American automakers may soon be required to install infrared biometric cameras and other systems that scan the driver’s body language, track their eyes, or monitor behaviours to determine whether the driver is intoxicated or too tired. According to critics, this data creates an entirely new database – a repository of people’s health and habits.

Car owners, however, are mostly unaware that cars are collecting such data. According to Darrell West, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Center for Technology Innovation, people would be shocked if they knew the sheer volume of data their car collects and transmits. “This basically means that your life can be reconstructed almost second by second,” West added.

Subscribe now

Sweden Fights Crime: Tracking Devices for Children

The Swedish government has announced a plan to fit at-risk children aged 13 and above with tracking wristbands to protect them from recruitment into criminal gangs. Social services will have the authority to decide whether this method will be used and whether a particular child is at risk. Officials estimate that approximately 50–100
children would be monitored this way to ensure compliance with curfews, according to Reclaim The Net.

According to Social Services Minister Camilla Waltersson Grönvall, the electronic wristband is designed to look like a watch or regular bracelet. It would therefore not be as conspicuous or stigmatizing as ankle monitors worn by convicted criminals. However, its function would be quite similar: it tracks the bearer’s movements and transmits information to the authorities. The Minister stated: “If children are at risk of falling into the hands of serious criminals, we must have more tools to protect them.” She added that electronic monitoring could be used in serious situations and is necessary for the protection of children.

According to the minister, there are currently about 173 children under the age of 15 who are suspected of involvement in murder or its planning. She also noted 52 evidentiary proceedings involving children this year, in which courts determine guilt if the child is below the age of criminal responsibility. However, no punishment will follow.

Critics view the electronic wristband as a device that monitors the child and their location, even though the child has not faced any conviction. The decision rests solely on a social worker’s assessment of a future risk, and the child does not need to have committed any offense. There only needs to be a probability of risk – in other words, monitoring based on conjecture. Critics argue that Sweden’s existing and planned laws collectively form a surveillance infrastructure focused on children. This treats the youngest members of society more as subjects of surveillance than as citizens in need of support. Children’s rights organizations, the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, and UNICEF have stated that such surveillance infringes on children’s civil liberties.

On the other hand, Sweden is grappling with serious crime, where gangs recruit minors precisely because the legal consequences are less severe. Last year, the Swedish police reported at least 1,700 minors and young people among criminal gang members, many recruited while in youth shelters.

Thus, the police have been granted – or are set to be granted – various additional rights to monitor children. Since last October, the Swedish police have had the right to monitor the electronic communications of children under 15, even without suspicion of a specific crime. Furthermore, as of July 1, the age of criminal responsibility for serious crimes will be lowered from 15 to 13. The government is also planning to grant the authorities the right to eavesdrop on a child’s phone calls, read their messages, and track their location in real time.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

1. Adam Smith, philosopher, and political economist (1723-1790)

   

2. Marcus Aurelius, Roman emperor and philosopher (121-180)

   

3. Baron de Montesquieu, French judge, intellectual, historian, and political philosopher (1689-1755)

   

• Von der Leyen Urges EU-Wide Social Media Age Verification

• Young Europeans Oppose a Social Media Ban

• France Files Charges Against Elon Musk and X Over Grok AI Content

Von der Leyen Urges EU-Wide Social Media Age Verification

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen delivered a speech on Tuesday in Copenhagen, Denmark, at a conference on child safety in the age of artificial intelligence. She described how European parents are concerned about protecting their children in the digital environment and affirmed that “we must build a digital world where our children can grow up freely and safely, protected by European values.”

The EC President noted that technology offers extraordinary opportunities, especially for young people, but the more children are exposed to the digital environment, the greater the risks. “Likes, shares, retweets, links, etcetera – social media validation is increasingly dictating how they think and feel. Constant judgment, constant comparison, and constant fear of not being enough. The pressure can be overwhelming,” von der Leyen explained. According to her, the consequences of the digital environment are serious: sleep deprivation, depression, anxiety, self-harm, addictive behavior, cyberbullying, grooming, exploitation, and suicide. Artificial intelligence further amplifies these risks, and tech companies exploit the opportunities they’ve created by treating children and young people as commodities and targeting them with advertising as early as possible for profit.

Von der Leyen disagrees with the view that the power of large tech companies is overwhelming and irreversible. She stated that we do not have to accept this, because “Europe has the power to act” and “it is us who decide our rules, not the tech companies.” She also listed the actions taken against platforms, such as TikTok’s automated content recommendations, Meta’s disregard for its own age restrictions, and uncensored content created using X’s artificial intelligence Grok. “All of this is possible because we have created a powerful tool - the Digital Services Act. And we have also created the Digital Markets Act to prevent platforms from abusing market power. We have already closed cases with Apple and Meta, with an investigation ongoing with Google,” von der Leyen noted, promising to hold all platforms that have broken the rules accountable.

According to von der Leyen, social media companies must be held responsible for the safety of their products and their secure use. At the same time, Europe has rules against addictive models, harmful content, and unwanted contacts. These protective measures should now be strengthened and expanded. However, in the EC President’s view, all existing measures fall short. Therefore, an “expert group on children’s online safety” has been established, which is expected to present its findings this summer.

However, von der Leyen stated that even without the group’s findings, she is convinced of the validity of age restrictions on social media. According to von der Leyen, it is no longer possible to ignore discussions regarding a minimum age for social media. At the same time, note that according to youth organizations, it seems quite obvious to lawmakers to ignore those whom the age limit affects the most. Young people are not being heard, and their opinions are not being taken into account because they do not align with those of officials.

In any case, the President of the European Commission is pleased that nearly all EU member states have agreed to at least consider an age restriction. So far, about 10 countries have announced their intention to impose a social media ban, and the European Parliament also recommends it. The politician is convinced that banning social media for young people will give children back their childhood, where they can learn to navigate social relationships and build self-confidence. “The question is not whether young people should have access to social media; the question is whether social media should have access to young people,” von der Leyen asked.

In addition, the EC President addressed the responsibility of parents and stated: “The responsibilities on parents are already so high, so let us take this additional weight from their shoulders.”

Von der Leyen also enthusiastically praised Australia’s social media ban for young people and claimed that “we can see the progress - fewer children and teenagers have social media accounts.” Fact note: a report published shortly before her speech indicated that around three-quarters of children still have accounts and social media remains popular. Many young users continue accessing platforms via workarounds. This suggests the ban’s effectiveness has been limited so far. In contrast, Australian law teaches young people that they do not have to comply with the law, since penalties are imposed only on the platforms, and those who follow the rules tend to become unpopular.

Ursula von der Leyen, however, believes that Europe should no longer debate whether to impose age restrictions on social media, but rather how to establish uniform rules: “So let us be focused, let us be fast, and let us define clear rules on how to structure a social media age restriction for Europe.”

In conclusion, von der Leyen praised the Commission’s age verification app as invaluable, claiming it meets all requirements, is private, and works on any device. This is despite cybersecurity experts managing to hack or bypass the app within minutes on the first day it was widely available. The EC President also emphasized that the app’s development was modeled after the vaccination passport app created during the COVID-19 pandemic: “It is built on the success of our European COVID App; you might recall that one. That App was used in 78 countries on 4 continents, so it is a proven and reliable model. And our Union is working with Member States to integrate it into their digital wallets.” In any case, the app created by the Commission is supposed to be easy to implement on all platforms, and soon there will be no excuse for not using it: “In other words, no more excuses – the technology for age verification is available.”

Share

Young Europeans Oppose a Social Media Ban

Student and youth representatives from France, Ireland, and the Netherlands argue that European lawmakers are ignoring those most affected by social media regulations. In the view of young people, a blanket ban solves nothing. Instead, platforms should be made safer, existing rules should be enforced more strictly, and digital literacy should be taught in schools, according to Euronews.

The youth movement Ctrl+Alt+Reclaim, which includes 16- to 17-year-olds from many European countries, drafted amendments to a bill currently under consideration in the French Parliament that aims to ban social media for children under 15. The group agreed that the impact of social media can be devastating, ranging from mental health issues to the polarization of society. However, the authorities are proposing a social media ban as the only solution, which the association believes is shortsighted and, in the worst case, could even be dangerous; at best, it is simply ineffective. They argue that a social media ban does not prevent the harmful effects of social media and does not protect children and young people, but rather worsens their digital lives.

According to Yaqoubi Reboul, a member of Ctrl+Alt+Reclaim, most young people initially thought, “Okay, the ban is great, it will protect us…”. But when it was explained to them that this would also mean losing access to Roblox, Fortnite, Instagram, and TikTok, everyone realized, “Oh my god, it’s not possible, we have to find another way.” According to the association, however, no one supports restricting social media. “Social media is one of the few remaining public spaces that is totally free and accessible for young people,” added Noe Hamon, another member of the association. “It also allows them to socialize, to learn things, to create, and to have a sense of community, especially as the physical world becomes increasingly ‘inaccessible’ for young people.”

Lauren Bondi (19), a board member of the Organizing Bureau of European School Student Unions (OBESSU), said that students are concerned about how the ban might change their daily lives. “They feel that the blame and responsibility for creating a safer digital world is really being placed upon them,” she said. Bondi explained that a blanket social media ban does not take students’ real lives into account, and students feel that their voices are not being heard. Bondi believes that while a ban may seem very appealing to lawmakers, platforms do not automatically become safer just because a young person turns 18. Thus, rather than a blanket ban, young people favor greater regulation and improved digital literacy.

Niels Zagema, a Dutch youth elected to represent young people on the European Commission President’s Youth Advisory Council, believes that there aren’t many things that influence young people’s lives more than social media. While young people acknowledge that restrictions and bans could help curb certain harmful habits, such as excessive phone use, they do not support blanket bans. Zagema suggests the Dutch guidelines as a solution, which recommend that parents introduce their children to technology in stages - for example, starting with instant messaging and only introducing social media once the child is 15.

According to Aisling Maloney, a representative of the Irish National Youth Council, social media was the only way for her to stay in touch with friends who, living in rural areas, were sometimes an hour’s drive away. Social media had also opened the door to a wider world for her, allowing her to explore topics not covered in school. In Maloney’s view, children should retain this opportunity, but in a safe and informed manner. In any case, Maloney urges authorities to collaborate with young people and discuss with them how to regulate social media.

Subscribe now

France Files Charges Against Elon Musk and X Over Grok AI Content

French prosecutors have announced they are seeking charges against Elon Musk and the social media platform X. This follows an investigation into xAI’s artificial intelligence Grok, which allegedly created uncensored images, spread disinformation, and helped deny crimes against humanity, according to France 24.

The charges also include complicity in the possession and unauthorized distribution of child sexual abuse images allegedly disseminated on X, as well as deepfakes and the illegal collection of personal data via the Grok AI system.

The French public prosecutor’s cybercrime unit launched an investigation into Musk’s X as early as January 2025. At the time, the focus was on allegations that X’s biased algorithms were distorting automated data processing. In February 2026, X’s offices in France were searched, and the investigation was expanded after allegations that Grok had been used to create sexual deepfakes. Grok was also accused of posting Holocaust denials. Specifically, Grok wrote in a French-language post that the gas chambers at the Auschwitz-Birkenau death camp were intended to “disinfect against typhus using Zyklon B,” not for mass murder. Such language is widely regarded as Holocaust denial. In subsequent posts, Grok corrected its stance, acknowledged the error, and confirmed the posts had been deleted.

Elon Musk and X’s former CEO Linda Yaccarino were invited to a “voluntary interview,” which they did not attend. According to the prosecutor’s office, their absence does not hinder the investigation.

In March, the Paris prosecutor’s office notified the U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission that “the controversy surrounding sexually explicit deepfakes generated by Grok may have been deliberately orchestrated to artificially boost the value of the companies X and xAI - potentially constituting criminal offenses.”

The study notes that over the past thirty years, private wealth in the European Union (EU) has grown significantly, but it has become increasingly concentrated in the hands of the wealthiest households. The share of wealth held by the top 10% has increased in particular. This trend is evident in nearly all EU member states, with the top 1% consistently increasing its share of total wealth – and doing so at a faster rate than its counterparts elsewhere in the world. According to the study, this wealth growth has been driven by rising asset prices and the expansion of pensions and financial portfolios. As a result, the share of the wealthiest is growing in the EU, while wealth growth among middle-class households has been slower. Even the wealthiest 0.01% have seen their wealth increase at a slightly slower rate than their counterparts in some of the countries outside the EU.

The study notes that the concentration of wealth is fast becoming a structural feature of the European economy, yet it remains unclear whether existing taxes are capable of ensuring fairness. Therefore, the study examined five categories of wealth-related taxes: net wealth taxes, recurrent (unrealised) capital gains taxes, non-recurrent (realised) capital gains taxes, inheritance and gift taxes, and exit taxes. It then analysed whether these taxes would help distribute the tax burden more fairly without negatively impacting investment, entrepreneurship, and economic growth.

Rationale for Inheritance and Gift Taxes: Europeans Have a Lot To Pass on

Of all wealth taxes, inheritance and gift taxes most directly target the transfer of assets between generations. According to the study, the macroeconomic significance of inheritances has grown in recent decades. The share of inheritances in government revenue and private wealth has increased in several European countries, and substantial inheritances play an increasingly important role in the formation of a very high net worth – including the creation of billionaires. However, inheritances are highly concentrated, and already wealthy households inherit more frequently and in greater amounts. Thus, according to the study, there is every reason to tax inheritances and gifts, as they are effective tools for increasing revenue and reducing wealth inequality.

Most of the EU countries (17) levy an inheritance tax, but many have abolished it, and some have never introduced it. In countries that still levy an inheritance tax, it is usually progressive. In such cases, tax rates vary based on the relationship between the donor and the recipient; for example, there are tax breaks for spouses and direct descendants, while higher tax rates apply to more distant relatives and non-relatives. In particular, numerous exemptions, concessions, and other preferential treatments apply to business assets and owner-occupied housing. However, all such benefits and special provisions significantly reduce state revenue.

In the case of inheritance and gift taxes, behavioral responses, i.e. how people respond to and cope with them, play a central role. Currently, data on these responses inside the EU remains limited, but it points to a strong motivation to avoid the tax through various means, particularly among wealthy families. These strategies include transferring assets during one’s lifetime (gifts), using other legal measures or tax incentives, and in some cases, moving assets to offshore jurisdictions. However, according to the study, this avoidance behaviour has a rather small impact on entrepreneurship and labour supply, as well as on overall wealth accumulation.

Thus the study concludes that if inheritance and gift taxes are well-designed, feature a broad tax base, integrate gifts and inheritances, are strictly enforced, and offer few opportunities for tax avoidance, then these taxes can effectively contribute to the state budget. At the same time, such taxes would reduce inequality in wealth and opportunity without significant distortion to the economy. In any case, the importance of inheritance and gift taxes will grow even further in the future, as a so-called “great transfer of wealth” from the older generation to the younger one still lies ahead.

Share

Exit Taxes: Country of Origin Should Receive Its Fair Share When People Move Abroad

Exit taxes apply to unrealised capital gains that arise when a person moves or transfers assets abroad. The purpose of the tax is to protect the state’s tax revenue so that profits generated within the country cannot be taken out without being taxed. Currently, EU countries apply exit taxes to different asset types, with varying thresholds, and deferral options. However, under EU law, exit taxes must not unduly hinder the free movement of people, and therefore taxpayers are permitted to pay the tax in installments or on a deferred basis.

The study notes that there is little evidence regarding the behavioral responses to an exit tax. At the sam time, studies on mobility suggest that it is rather rare for the wealthy to move elsewhere. Furthermore, an exit tax is not the main factor that would cause the wealthy to relocate. For them, incentives in the destination country are far more important than taxes. Thus, the study finds that an exit tax can generate revenue even if very few taxpayers are affected. The key is that the tax is simple, clear, with enforceable assessment rules, and benefits from strong international cooperation.

Subscribe now

Net Wealth Taxes Work Best When They Target Only the Very Wealthy

According to the study, net wealth taxes are important but rare in Europe. Only a few EU countries currently tax net wealth, such as Switzerland and Spain. However, quite a few countries have abolished their former net wealth taxes, including Germany and Sweden, where a narrow and inconsistent tax base, extensive tax exemptions, the ability to self-assess, and similar factors reduced revenue while creating a sense of unfairness.

The study concludes that a net wealth tax works best when it taxes only the very wealthy, using high thresholds and uniform tax bases and valuation rules. Successful systems depend on reliable asset data, continuous valuation, and the ability to combat tax evasion, such as through debt restructuring or shifting assets into preferential categories. According to the study, key components of a net wealth tax include comprehensive asset registries, third-party reporting, digitalization, and strong enforcement.

At the same time, the study confirms the existence of behavioral responses as such, particularly among the high-net-worth individuals, but these are likely to remain moderate if the tax is well-targeted. Thus a broad-based, uniform, high-threshold, and vigorously enforced net wealth tax could improve revenue. The key is that the tax should not be fragmented or based on distortive incentives.

Recurring Tax or One-Time Tax on Capital Gains

Read more

• EU Aims To Block VPN Bypass To Enforce Age Verification

• Moderna Has Been Developing mRNA Vaccine for Hantavirus Since 2023

• Conviction of Comedy Writer Graham Linehan Overturned

EU Aims To Block VPN Bypass To Enforce Age Verification

The European Commission held a press conference on age verification for social media. Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice-President for Tech Sovereignty, Security and Democracy, explained that the Commission has issued recommendations on age verification. Specific expectations have been set for member states, but the Commission particularly wants countries to develop their own national solutions.

Journalists asked how the Commission plans to address VPNs that help users circumvent age verification. Henna Virkkunen confirmed that such technology exists and stressed that the Commission must find effective ways to enforce age verification. She noted that the Commission’s age verification app is already secure and privacy-friendly, but the next challenge is preventing bypasses, for example via VPNs. Her remarks indicated a focus on stricter enforcement of existing rules rather than seeking new powers. “The DSA requires platforms to enforce their own rules: terms and conditions should not be mere written statements, but rather the basis for concrete action to protect users, including children,” she said.

Virkkunen emphasized that the EU age verification system goes hand in hand with enforcement of the Digital Services Act (DSA) and added that the Commission has already identified violations, noting that Instagram and Facebook have failed to keep children under 13 off their platforms – despite Meta’s own 13+ age limit. According to the Commission, around 12% of children under the limit still access these platforms. Currently, however, the platforms are doing far too little to enforce their own rules, and it is easy for children to provide a false date of birth. The Commission expects Meta to significantly strengthen its practices.

Finally, Virkkunen highlighted a strong link to digital identity wallets: “There is a very strong connection now to our digital identity wallets as well, because this is required by our legislation – Member States are supposed to provide this by the end of this year – and this is now an opportunity to include this age verification app as part of the digital wallet solution, which Member States are supposed to provide for their citizens by the end of this year, so there is already binding legislation.”

Virkkunen acknowledged that full results on social media age restrictions are not expected until summer, but warned that the situation requires immediate action, as many Member States are already preparing national social media bans (see here, here, here, here, here).

Share

Moderna Has Been Developing mRNA Vaccine for Hantavirus Since 2023

The Vaccine Innovation Center at Korea University and the U.S. biotechnology company Moderna have been jointly developing a hantavirus mRNA vaccine since 2023. The vaccine candidate is currently awaiting funding to begin clinical trials on humans, according to Brussels Signal.

Korea University and Moderna signed an agreement under Moderna’s mRNA Access initiative. This program provides preclinical mRNA vaccine candidates to academic groups working on new or neglected infectious diseases. In February 2025, a research team led by Professor Park Man-Sung of the Department of Microbiology at Korea University College of Medicine announced that experimental doses prevented hantavirus infection in mice.

Hantavirus has been in the spotlight in recent days after several infected individuals were identified among passengers on a cruise ship sailing on the Atlantic Ocean. According to the WHO, eight cases have been identified so far (as of 8 May), including three deaths. Although this is a serious incident, the organization assesses the public health risk as low.

The virus is usually transmitted to humans via rodents, but certain strains – such as the Andes virus, found in South America – are currently known to allow limited human-to-human transmission among very close contacts. However, according to WHO data, such transmission is very rare. Hantavirus can cause several illnesses, including haemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS), which occurs mostly in Europe and Asia and primarily affects the kidneys, and hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome (HCPS), which occurs mostly in the Americas and primarily affects the lungs and heart.

In Korea, approximately 300–400 cases of hantavirus are reported annually, primarily among young men in military service. For this reason, Korea has placed hantavirus on its list of future pandemic threats. Since 1990, Korea has had access to the inactivated vaccine Hantavax, which offers limited long-term protection and does not cover the strains causing hantavirus pulmonary syndrome found in the West.

The current collaboration has been supported by Hyundai Motor Group Honorary Chairman Chung Mong-Koo with 10 billion won (about 6.5 million euros), but clinical-grade material requires an additional 10–20 billion won (6.5–13 million euros). Due to a lack of funds, clinical trials on humans have been suspended for about a year, pending additional funding.

Subscribe now

Conviction of Comedy Writer Graham Linehan Overturned

Irish screenwriter Graham Linehan has been on trial for some time, accused of harassing transgender woman Sophia Brookes on social media and damaging her phone. Last November, a court acquitted Linehan of the harassment charge, but found him guilty of damaging the phone. The court has now overturned that latter conviction and acquitted Linehan of property damage as well, reports the Free Speech Union.

According to Linehan, the harassment and property damage charges stemmed from an incident at the “Battle of Ideas” conference held in London in October. Linehan allegedly took the phone of Sophia Brookes, a man who identifies as a woman, threw it to the ground, causing £369 (approximately €427) in damage, and posted insulting comments about her.

Last November, a district court acquitted Linehan of the harassment charge. The court found that while his posts were “highly unpleasant, offensive, and even unnecessary,” they were not particularly oppressive. However, the court found him guilty of causing property damage.

Now, the Court of Appeal has also acquitted Linehan of causing property damage, concluding that it has not been proven that Linehan caused any damage at all. “Having considered all the evidence before us, we cannot be sure that the damage to the complainant’s phone was caused by Mr. Linehan on the evening of October 19, 2024. We therefore find Mr. Linehan not guilty of the offense,” the judge explained.

At the appellate court hearing, Sophia Brookes said she had hoped to “shame Graham Linehan into apologizing” after he previously referred to her on social media as a “domestic terrorist.” According to Linehan’s attorney, this made it clear that Brookes was there to cause disruption, provoke, and irritate critics of trans ideology, hoping to elicit a negative reaction from them.

Linehan said after the court hearing: “There has been a troubling pattern of police forces across the country who time and again believe trans rights activists, even when there has been overwhelming evidence that complaints against gender-critical campaigners were made in bad faith. The police have failed in their duty to properly and fairly investigate, preferring instead to support one side over the other in an important debate. All this has done is erode the faith the public should be able to have in the police.”

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

1. Ronald Reagan, 40th president of the United States (1911-2004)

   

2. Voltaire, philosopher (1694-1778)

   

3. Margaret Thatcher, politician (1925-2013)

   

• 75% of Australian Youth Ignoring Social Media Ban

• UK Online Age Restrictions Easily Bypassed

• UK Flights May Be Cancelled Weeks in Advance

75% of Australian Youth Ignoring Social Media Ban

A social media ban for those under 16 came into full effect in Australia last December, and the country has been enforcing it for four months. Researchers at the Becker Friedman Institute at the University of Chicago examined the results and found that approximately three-quarters of young people are ignoring the ban, writes Reclaim The Net.

In the paper “Why Bans Fail: Turning Points and the Australian Social Media Ban,” the researchers surveyed 746 Australian teenagers from March to April 2026. They found that only about 27% of 14- to 15-year-olds comply with the ban, while 73% still use ten prohibited platforms — Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, X, YouTube, Reddit, Twitch, Threads, or Kik.

Teens continue to use social media despite nearly universal awareness of the ban (86%). Young people are well aware that no consequences await them for breaking the law. Nearly half (47%) correctly know that the law places full responsibility on the platforms, which face fines of up to 49.5 million Australian dollars. Only 22% of young people believe that ignoring the ban carries any consequences to them. As a result, most have concluded that the law is not aimed at them.

75% of teenagers believe that the social media ban can be circumvented very easily or with minimal effort. The most common methods cited include lying about their age in verification questions (57%), entering a false date of birth during registration (44%), borrowing a parent’s or older sibling’s account (42%), and using a VPN (30%). According to a quarter of respondents, a parent or older sibling helped them register a new account. Moreover, 64% of survey participants noted that the platforms hadn’t detected them in four months and their accounts had never been suspended.

Researchers also asked the teenagers how many of their peers should stop using social media before they would. The average response was that 69% of their peers should stop. The result did not change depending on the wording of the question or the comparison group. In each scenario, at least 62–69% of others would need to leave the platforms before the respondent would quit as well.

The study also revealed a sad reality: 47% of the teenagers surveyed believed that less popular kids are the ones who follow the rules, while young people with greater social influence are likely to have stayed on social media. Among those who still use the platforms, 52% believed that rule-followers are definitely less popular. Only 5% believed that those who follow the rules are more popular. The authors highlight the example of smoking, where popular students were the first to quit. In contrast, Australia’s social media ban shows the opposite: popular kids stay, less popular kids leave, and being on social media is still seen as cool.

In summary, Australia has created a law that its target audience does not follow, that is easy to circumvent, and that seems to hit less popular children and young people the hardest. The ban has in no way changed the social environment it was meant to change. However, it does teach young people how laws “work” when they are created about them, but not for them.

Share

UK Online Age Restrictions Easily Bypassed

Last summer, the Online Safety Act came into force in the UK. It introduced measures to improve online safety for children and young people, including age restrictions on certain websites. Internet Matters has now published an analysis showing that children are circumventing age verification with highly creative solutions, while many parents are helping their children bypass them.

The report’s authors examined the impact of the Online Safety Act through families’ experiences, using survey and focus group data collected after the provisions took effect. Overall, families have noticed some improvements. About seven out of ten children and parents (68%/67%) have noticed better safety features, such as improved notification tools, more content being flagged, and certain features being restricted. 64% of parents have also observed improved parental control measures, and 53% of children report having to verify their age when creating an account. As a result, 39% of parents and 42% of children believe the online environment has become safer. However, 28% of parents and 16% of children hold the opposite view, believing that the internet is now even less safe.

However, despite some progress, families believe children are still exposed to a vast amount of harmful content. 49% of children said they have recently encountered harmful content online, including violence (12%), content promoting unrealistic body images (11%), and content inciting hatred (10%). All of this should be inaccessible to children.

Children consider age verification measures to be simple: presenting an ID (88%), age estimation based on facial appearance (89%), and a third-party app (88%). However, nearly half of children (46%) believe it is easy to bypass age verification, and 32% claim to have done so. They do this by using a false date of birth (13%), the face of another person - sometimes even a character from a movie or video game (9%) - or help from a parent (26%), as well as VPNs in fewer cases. But there are also more creative solutions. For example, the mother of a 12-year-old described catching her son using an eyebrow pencil to draw a mustache on his face to look older. In any case, only 17% of children find bypassing age verification difficult.

Children also provided examples of how age verification works in practice. One 12-year-old girl explained that if, while watching a TikTok live stream, the AI detects that she is not 18, she gets blocked - but only for 10 minutes, after which she can return. Regarding Roblox, a 12-year-old boy described how the platform identified him as 15 based on his face, allowing him to chat with older users even though he shouldn’t. A 14-year-old explained that the more restrictions there are, the more people want to bypass them. A 13-year-old, however, explained that even adults can easily use someone else’s face to trick the system into classifying them as a child. This is also confirmed by recent reports indicating that Roblox accounts belonging to minors are being sold online.

Even those young people who follow the rules describe negative consequences. For example, one 15-year-old explained that all websites offering help with issues such as eating disorders and suicidal thoughts are now censored. A 12-year-old added that while they used to be able to talk to anyone, there are now age-based restrictions, so they can only communicate with their own age group. This means social interaction is completely cut off if their friends fall into a different age group.

In addition to many parents helping their children bypass age restrictions or turning a blind eye to their “mistakes,” many parents have also noticed the negative aspects of the rules. For example, according to the father of a 14-year-old, children now know much better than their parents how to bypass parental controls. The mother of a 13-year-old confirmed that children are smart and experienced and know how to bend the rules. The mother of a 12-year-old explained that she can set any limits and restrictions for her child, but the parents of their friends might not care, so the child will still see all the content.

In addition, both children and parents expressed serious concerns about the transmission of biometric data to monitoring platforms. Some parents argued that children cannot tell the difference between a real website and a fake one. “If all websites have facial recognition and they visit a site that isn’t legitimate, their faces and documents could be used for illegal activities,” one added.

Subscribe now

UK Flights May Be Cancelled Weeks in Advance

British government has proposed allowing airlines to cancel flights weeks in
advance if they face fuel shortages. The government says the aim is to help
airlines plan ahead and avoid last-minute cancellations, reports the BBC.

In addition, airlines could be allowed to reroute passengers from their booked flight to a similar one to save fuel. For example, if Lufthansa operates 10 daily flights between London Heathrow and Frankfurt, it could cancel two of the ten flights and move morning passengers to afternoon ones at its discretion, especially since business travel is lighter in summer.

Under normal circumstances, airlines are reluctant to make such changes because it risks their valuable airport slot quotas. Popular slots can be worth tens of millions of pounds. Slots are usually carried over to the next year only if an airline uses at least 80% of them; otherwise, they may go to competitors. The UK government has proposed that cancelled flights under this scheme will not affect slot retention. Transport Minister Heidi Alexander confirmed there are currently no disruptions in UK jet fuel supplies, although the situation is evolving rapidly. She added that current information suggests most summer travellers will face conditions similar to those of last summer.

Airlines also report no current fuel supply problems. However, experts warn that disruptions linked to the conflict in Iran and the Strait of Hormuz could cause shortages within weeks. The International Energy Agency has cautioned that without alternative supplies, a fuel shortage could hit Europe as early as June. At the same time, European low-cost carriers like Transavia, Ryanair, and Volotea have already begun cancelling some May and June flights, citing sharply higher kerosene prices rather than outright unavailability. While governments and airports report strategic stocks that should protect peak summer travel - particularly at major hubs - travellers can still expect higher ticket prices and possible schedule reductions.