Today’s News 17th January 2025

• The Technocratic Blueprint – A Century In The Making
  The Technocratic Blueprint – A Century In The Making

  Authored by Joshua Stylman via substack,

  “Humanity will attempt to overcome its limitations and arrive at fuller fruition,” declared Julian Huxley in 1957, coining the term “transhumanism.” 

  By 2022, Yuval Noah Harari would announce its dark fulfillment:

  “Humans are now hackable animals. The whole idea of free will… that’s over. Today we have the technology to hack human beings on a massive scale. Everything is being digitized, everything is being monitored. In this time of crisis, you have to follow science. It’s often said you should never allow a good crisis to go to waste, because a crisis is an opportunity to also do ‘good’ reforms that in normal times people would never agree to. But in a crisis, you have no chance, so you better do what we – the people who understand – tell you to do.”

  Like Truman Burbank in ‘The Truman Show,’ we inhabit a world where reality itself is increasingly engineered. And like Truman, most remain unaware of the extent of this engineering until shown the patterns. But unlike Truman’s physical dome with its obvious cameras and artificial sets, our manufactured environment operates through sophisticated technological systems and invisible digital constraints. The mechanics of this reality engineering – from media manipulation to social programming – were explored in detail in our previous analysis. Now we turn to the driving force behind this manufactured world: technocracy, the system of control that makes such reality engineering possible on a global scale.

  

  The technocratic architecture wasn’t merely passed down through institutions – it flowed through bloodlines. At the heart of this dynastic web sits Thomas Henry Huxley, known as “Darwin’s Bulldog,” who helped establish scientific materialism as the new religion while serving on the influential Rhodes Round Table. His son Leonard carried this torch forward, while grandsons Aldous and Julian became key architects of the modern world order. These weren’t random connections but rather the careful cultivation of multi-generational power networks.

  The connections deepen through marriage and association. Charles Galton Darwin, grandson of Charles Darwin, wrote “The Next Million Years” in 1952, outlining population control through technological means. His son would later marry into the Huxley line, creating a powerful nexus of influence spanning science, culture, and governance.

  This intergenerational project has evolved with technological capability. Where Rockefeller once declared “we need a nation of workers, not thinkers” while building his educational information factory today’s technocrats face a different equation. As artificial intelligence eliminates the need for human labor, the focus shifts from creating compliant workers to managing population reduction – not through overt force, but through sophisticated social engineering.

  BlackRock CEO Larry Fink recently made this shift explicit, explaining how AI and automation will reshape population dynamics: “In developed countries with shrinking populations… these countries will rapidly develop robotics and AI technology… the social problems that one will have in substituting humans for machines will be far easier in those countries that have declining populations.” His candid assessment reveals how technological capability drives elite agendas – as human labor becomes less necessary, population reduction becomes more desirable.

  Climate change messaging, declining birth rates, and the normalization of euthanasia aren’t random developments but logical extensions of this evolving agenda.

  From World Brain to Digital Hive Mind

  In 1937, a British science fiction writer imagined a future where all human knowledge would be instantly accessible to everyone. Today, we call it the Internet. But H.G. Wells saw more than just technology. “The world has a World Brain to which, ultimately, all knowledge is to be addressed,” he wrote, “and it has a nervous system of road, railway, and air communication which is already beginning to bind mankind into a whole.” His vision went beyond mere information sharing. Through “The Open Conspiracy,” he called for “a movement of all that is intelligent in the world,” explicitly advocating for technocratic governance by a scientific elite who would gradually assume control of society. “The Open Conspiracy must be, from its very inception, a world movement, and not merely an English movement or a Western movement. It must be a movement of all that is intelligent in the world.” Wells here laid out his schema for a class of educated, rational individuals who would lead this global transformation. Even his fictional work “Shape of Things to Come” reads like a blueprint, particularly in its description of how a pandemic might facilitate global governance.

  This plan found its institutional expression through Julian Huxley at UNESCO. ‘The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent and evolutionary in background,’ he declared as its first Director-General. Through works like “Religion Without Revelation” (1927), Huxley didn’t merely suggest replacing traditional faith – he outlined a new religious orthodoxy with Science as its deity and experts as its priesthood. This quasi-religious devotion to scientific authority would become the framework for today’s unquestioning acceptance of expert proclamations on everything from vaccine mandates to climate policies. Most civilians lack the specialized knowledge to evaluate these complex technical issues, yet are expected to embrace them with religious fervor – “trust the science” becoming the modern equivalent of “trust in faith.” This blind deference to scientific authority, precisely as Huxley envisioned, has transformed science from a method of inquiry into a system of belief.

  The Huxley family provided the intellectual architecture for this transformation. Julian Huxley’s “scientific world humanism” at UNESCO established the institutional framework, while his brother Aldous revealed the psychological methodology. In his 1958 interview with Mike Wallace, Aldous Huxley explained how rapid technological change could overwhelm populations, making them “lose their capacity for critical analysis.” His description of “control through overwhelm” perfectly describes our current state of constant technological disruption, where people are too disoriented by rapid change to effectively resist new control systems.

  Most crucially, Huxley emphasized the importance of “gradual” implementation – suggesting that by carefully pacing technological and social changes, resistance could be managed and new control systems normalized over time. This strategy of gradualism, mirroring the Fabian Society’s approach, can be seen in everything from the slow erosion of privacy rights to the incremental implementation of digital surveillance systems. His warning about psychological conditioning through media foreshadowed today’s social media algorithms and digital behavior modification.

  Zbigniew Brzezinski’s “Between Two Ages” expanded this framework, describing a coming “technetronic era” marked by surveillance of citizens, control through technology, manipulation of behavior, and global information networks. He was remarkably explicit about this blueprint: “The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values… Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.” Today, many might recognize his daughter Mika Brzezinski as co-host of MSNBC’s Morning Joe – while her father shaped geopolitical theory, she would go on to influence public opinion through media, demonstrating how establishment influence adapts across generations

  Wells’ framework of a “World Brain” – an interconnected global information network – has become a reality through the rise of artificial intelligence and the Internet. This centralization of knowledge and data mirrors the technocratic ambition for an AI-powered global society, as exemplified by initiatives like the AI World Society (AIWS).

  George Orwell’s predictions have become our daily reality: telescreens tracking our movements have become smart devices with always-on cameras and microphones. Newspeak limiting acceptable speech emerged as content moderation and political correctness. The memory hole erasing inconvenient facts operates through digital censorship and “fact-checking.” Thought crime punishing wrong opinions appears as social credit systems and digital reputation scores. Perpetual war maintaining control continues through endless conflicts and the “war on terror.”

  Consider how major publications systematically preview coming technological transformations: mainstream media’s promotion of the “never offline” mentality preceded widespread adoption of wearable surveillance devices that now converge human biology and digital technology – what’s now called the “Internet of Bodies.”

  These aren’t random predictions – they represent coordinated efforts to acclimate the public to increasingly invasive technologies that blur the boundaries between the physical and digital realms. This pattern of previewing control systems through mainstream media serves a dual purpose: it normalizes surveillance while positioning resistance as futile or backward-looking. By the time these systems are fully implemented, the public has already been conditioned to accept them as inevitable progress.

  

  If Orwell showed us the stick, Huxley revealed the carrot. While Orwell warned of control through pain, Huxley predicted control through pleasure. His dystopia of genetic castes, widespread mood-altering drugs, and endless entertainment parallels our world of CRISPR technology, psychiatric medication, and digital addiction.

  While the theoretical foundations were established through visionaries like Wells and Huxley, implementing their ideas required institutional frameworks. The transformation from abstract concepts to global control systems would emerge through carefully crafted networks of influence.

  From Round Tables to Global Governance

  When Cecil Rhodes died in 1902, he left more than just a diamond fortune. His will outlined a roadmap for a new kind of empire – one built not through military conquest, but through the careful cultivation of future leaders who would think and act as one. Carroll Quigley, in his influential work “Tragedy and Hope,” provided insider insights into the power structures he observed, noting how “the powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences.”

  This would manifest through a network based on human connection and institutional influence. Rhodes envisioned creating an elite network that would extend British influence globally while fostering Anglo-American cooperation. His doctrine wasn’t just about political power – it was about shaping the very mechanisms through which future leaders would think and operate.

  The machinery of global control has undergone a profound transformation since Rhodes’ time. The 1.0 model of globalism operated through nation-states, colonialism, and the explicit structures of the British Empire. Today’s Globalism 2.0 operates through corporate and financial institutions, steering power toward centralized global governance without the need for formal empire. Organizations like the Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, and Tavistock Institute have spent 50 to 100 years guiding global programs and policies, gradually centralizing power, influence, and resources among an increasingly concentrated elite. The Bilderberg Group, in particular, has facilitated private discussions among influential political and business leaders, shaping high-level decision-making behind closed doors.

  The Rhodes Scholarships served as more than an educational program – they created a pipeline for identifying and cultivating future leaders who would advance this technocratic agenda. The Round Table Movement that emerged from Rhodes’ blueprint would establish influential groups in key countries, creating informal networks that would shape global policy for generations.

  From these Round Tables emerged key institutions of global governance: the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) in London and the Council on Foreign Relations in the United States. These organizations wouldn’t merely discuss policy – they would create the intellectual framework through which policy could be imagined. Their members would go on to establish the League of Nations, the United Nations, and the Bretton Woods system.

  Alice Bailey’s vision, articulated through Lucis Trust (founded in 1922 as Lucifer Publishing Company before being renamed in 1925), foreshadowed and helped shape aspects of today’s global institutions. While not directly establishing the UN, Lucis Trust’s influence can be seen in the organization’s spiritual and philosophical foundations, including the Meditation Room at UN headquarters. In “The Externalization of the Hierarchy”, written over several decades and published in 1957, Bailey outlined a vision for global transformation that parallels many current UN initiatives. Her writings described changes we now see manifesting: reformed education systems promoting global citizenship, environmental programs restructuring society, spiritual institutions merging into universal beliefs, and economic systems becoming increasingly integrated. Most notably, she specified 2025 as the target date for this “externalization of the hierarchy” – a timeline that aligns with many current global initiatives, including the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

  

  Today, this gameplan manifests through the World Economic Forum, where Klaus Schwab, mentored by Henry Kissinger, implements these historical technocratic guides. As Kissinger stated in 1992, “A New World Order will emerge. The only question is whether it will arise out of intellectual and moral insight, and by design, or whether it will be forced on mankind by a series of catastrophes.” Klaus Schwab’s WEF actively shapes this order, “penetrating cabinets” through its Young Global Leaders program. As Schwab himself boasted, “What we are very proud of is that we penetrate the global cabinets of countries” – a claim evidenced by the fact that multiple cabinet members in countries like Canada, France, Germany, New Zealand, as well as U.S. politicians such as Gavin Newsom, Pete Buttigieg, and Huma Abedin had gone through the WEF’s leadership initiatives.

  Programming the Future: Selling the Cage

  Edward Bernays, nephew of Sigmund Freud, developed the psychological framework that would become modern marketing and social media manipulation. This family connection was no coincidence – Freud’s psychological insights about human nature would be weaponized by his nephew into tools for mass manipulation. This pattern of family influence continues today – the co-founder of Netflix, Marc Bernays Randolph, is Edward Bernays’ great-nephew, demonstrating how these bloodlines continue shaping our cultural consumption. The techniques of “engineering consent” and managing public opinion that Edward Bernays pioneered now operate through digital platforms at unprecedented scale, setting the stage for the phenomenon of predictive programming.

  Predictive programming operates by presenting future control systems as entertainment, normalizing them before implementation. When reality mirrors fiction, the public has been pre-conditioned to accept it. This isn’t mere coincidence – these narratives systematically prepare populations for planned transformations.

  As theorist Alan Watt explains, “predictive programming works to create a psychological conditioning in our minds through a Pavlovian-like process. By repeatedly exposing people to future events or control systems through entertainment media, the responses become familiar and those events are then accepted as natural occurrences when they manifest in reality.”

  Hollywood serves as the primary vehicle for normalizing technocratic ideas. Movies and TV shows consistently present future scenarios that later become reality:

  • Minority Report” (2002) predicted personalized advertising and gesture-controlled interfaces → Now we have targeted ads and touchless controls

  • Iron Man” (2008) normalized brain-computer interfaces for everyday use → Now we see Neuralink and other neural implant initiatives gaining public acceptance

  • Black Mirror” (2011-) episodes about social credit scores → China implemented similar systems

  • Contagion” (2011) eerily predicted pandemic responses → Many of its scenes played out in real life

  • The Social Network” (2010) portrayed tech disruption as inevitable and leaders as brilliant outsiders → Leading to widespread technocrat worship

  • Person of Interest” (2011) depicted mass surveillance through AI → Now we have widespread facial recognition and predictive policing

  • “Her” (2013) depicted an intimate relationship between a human and an AI assistant, presaging the erosion of traditional human bonds

  • “Elysium” (2013) depicted technological class division → Now we see increasing discussion of transhuman enhancement limited to elites

  • “Transcendence” (2014) explored human consciousness merging with AI → Now we see Neuralink and other brain-computer interface initiatives advancing rapidly

  • “Ready Player One” (2018) normalized full digital immersion and virtual economy → Now we see metaverse initiatives and digital asset markets

  Even children’s entertainment plays a role. Movies like WALL-E predict environmental collapse, while children’s films like Disney/Pixar’s Big Hero 6 show technology “saving” humanity. The message remains consistent: technology will solve our problems, but at the cost of traditional human relationships and freedoms. This systematic conditioning through media would require an equally systematic institutional framework to implement at scale.

  While Bernays and his successors developed the psychological framework for mass influence, implementing these ideas at scale required a robust institutional architecture. The translation of these manipulation techniques from theory to practice would emerge through carefully constructed networks of influence, each building upon the other’s work. These networks wouldn’t just share ideas – they would actively shape the mechanisms through which future generations would understand and interact with the world.

  The Institutional Network

  The technocratic map required specific institutions for its implementation. The Fabian Society, whose coat of arms tellingly featured a wolf in sheep’s clothing and a tortoise logo representing their motto of “when I strike, I strike hard” and “slow and steady change”, established mechanisms for gradual social transformation. This gradualist approach would become a template for how institutional change could be implemented without triggering resistance.

  

  The translation of technocratic theory into global policy required institutional muscle. Organizations like the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations didn’t merely support these initiatives – they systematically restructured society through strategic funding and policy implementation. The Rockefeller Foundation’s influence over medicine mirrored Ford’s reshaping of education, creating interconnected mechanisms of control over health and knowledge. These foundations operated as more than philanthropic organizations – they served as incubators for technocratic governance, carefully cultivating networks of influence through grants, fellowships, and institutional support. Their work demonstrated how apparent charity could mask profound social engineering, a pattern that continues with today’s tech philanthropists.

  Bill Gates exemplifies this evolution – his foundation wields unprecedented influence over global health policy while simultaneously investing in digital ID systems, synthetic foods, and surveillance technologies. His acquisition of vast agricultural holdings, becoming America’s largest private farmland owner, parallels his control over global seed preservation and distribution systems. Like Rockefeller before him, Gates uses philanthropic giving to shape multiple domains – from public health and education to agriculture and digital identity. His transhumanist vision extends to patenting human-computer interfaces, positioning himself to influence not just our food and health systems, but potentially human biology itself through technological integration. Through strategic media investments and carefully managed public relations, these activities are typically portrayed as charitable initiatives rather than exercises in control. His work demonstrates how modern philanthropists have perfected their predecessors’ methods of using charitable giving to engineer social transformation.

  The transformation of medicine offers a stark example of how control systems evolved. Jonas Salk, celebrated as a humanitarian for his vaccine work, revealed darker motivations in books like “The Survival of the Wisest” and “World Population and Human Values: A New Reality,” which explicitly advocated eugenics and depopulation agendas. This pattern of apparent philanthropy masking population control repeats throughout the century, forcing us to reconsider many of our assumed heroes of progress.

  The weaponization of social division emerged through careful academic study. Margaret Mead and Gregory Bateson’s work in Papua New Guinea, particularly their concept of schismogenesis (the creation of social rifts), provided the theoretical framework for modern social engineering. While presented as neutral anthropological research, their studies effectively created a manual for societal manipulation through the exploitation of internal strife. Bateson’s “Steps to an Ecology of Mind” revealed how communication patterns and feedback loops could shape both individual and collective behavior. The concept of schismogenesis described how initial separations could be amplified into self-reinforcing cycles of opposition – a process we now see deliberately deployed through social media algorithms and mainstream news programming.

  Matt Taibbi’s “Hate Inc.” provides a powerful contemporary analysis of how these principles operate in our digital age. What Bateson observed in tribal cultures, Taibbi documents in today’s media ecosystem – the systematic exploitation of division through algorithmic content delivery and engagement metrics, creating an industrialized form of schismogenesis that drives social control through manufactured conflict, even as the establishment “uniparty” converges on key issues like foreign policy.

  The Royal Institute of International Affairs and Council on Foreign Relations shaped international policy frameworks, while the Tavistock Institute developed and refined psychological operations techniques. The Frankfurt School reshaped cultural criticism, and the Trilateral Commission guided economic integration. Each of these organizations serves multiple roles: incubating technocratic ideas, training future leaders, networking key influencers, developing policy frameworks, and engineering social change.

  Bertrand Russell’s “The Impact of Science on Society” provided the blueprint for modern educational control. “The subject which will be of most importance politically is Mass Psychology,” he wrote. “Its importance has been enormously increased by the growth of modern methods of propaganda. Of these the most influential is what is called ‘education’.” His frank explorations of population control and scientific governance find expression in contemporary discussions about expert rule and “following the science.” These ideas now manifest in standardized digital education systems and AI-driven learning platforms.

  The Club of Rome’s “Limits to Growth” deserves special attention for establishing the intellectual framework behind current environmental and population control initiatives. Their stark declaration that “the common enemy of humanity is man” revealed their true agenda. As they explicitly stated in”’The First Global Revolution” (1991): ‘In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill… All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.’ Their predictions of resource scarcity weren’t just about environmental concerns – they provided the foundation for today’s climate change messaging and population control initiatives, enabling control through both resource allocation and demographic engineering.

  These institutional structures didn’t remain static – they evolved with technological capability. What began as physical systems of control would find their ultimate expression in digital infrastructure, achieving a level of surveillance and behavioral modification that earlier technocrats could only imagine.

  Modern Implementation: The Convergence of Control Systems

  Modern surveillance architecture pervades every aspect of daily life. Smart devices monitor millions of people’s sleep patterns and vital signs while AI assistants guide our daily routines under the guise of convenience. Just as Truman’s world was controlled through hidden cameras and staged interactions, our digital environment monitors and shapes our behavior through devices we willingly embrace. News and information flow through carefully curated algorithmic filters that shape our worldview, while workplace surveillance and automation increasingly define our professional environments. Our entertainment arrives through recommendation systems, our social interactions are mediated through digital platforms, and our purchases are tracked and influenced through targeted advertising. Where Truman’s world was controlled by a single producer and production team, our engineered reality operates through integrated frameworks of technological control. The infrastructure of technocracy – from digital surveillance to behavioral modification algorithms – provides the practical means for implementing this control at scale, far beyond anything depicted in Truman’s artificial world.

  Like Truman’s carefully controlled environment, our digital world creates an illusion of choice while every interaction is monitored and shaped. But unlike Truman’s physical cameras, our surveillance system is invisible – embedded in the devices and platforms we voluntarily embrace. Even our health decisions are increasingly guided by “expert” algorithms, our children’s education becomes standardized through digital platforms, and our travel is continuously monitored through digital tickets and GPS. Most insidiously, our money itself is transforming into trackable digital currency, completing the surveillance circuit. Just as Truman’s every purchase and movement was carefully tracked within his artificial world, our financial transactions and physical movements are increasingly monitored and controlled through digital systems – but with far greater precision and scope than anything possible in Truman’s manufactured reality.

  Historical agendas have manifested with remarkable precision in our current systems. Wells’ World Brain has become our Internet, while Huxley’s soma takes the form of widespread SSRIs. Bailey’s dreams of global governance emerge through the UN and WEF, as Brzezinski’s technetronic era arrives as surveillance capitalism. Russell’s educational outline manifests in digital learning platforms, Bernays’ manipulation techniques power social media, and the Club of Rome’s environmental concerns drive climate change policy. Each historical blueprint finds its modern implementation, creating converging networks of control.

  The next phase of control systems is already emerging. Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) are creating what amounts to a digital gulag, where every transaction requires approval and can be monitored or prevented. Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) scores extend this control to corporate behavior, while AI governance increasingly automates decision-making processes. This new paradigm effectively codifies “cancel culture”, diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives into the monetary system, creating a comprehensive system of financial control

  Initiatives like the Internet of Bodies and the development of smart cities overseen by governing bodies like the C40 network further demonstrate how the technocratic vision is being implemented in the present day. These efforts to meld human biology with digital technology, and to centralize urban infrastructure under technocratic control, represent the logical extension of the historical blueprint outlined throughout this essay.

  Understanding to Resist

  The technocratic future isn’t coming – it’s here. Every day, we live out the predictions these thinkers made decades ago. But understanding their vision gives us power.

  Just as Truman Burbank finally sailed toward the boundaries of his artificial world, recognizing the illusion that had constrained him, we too must muster the courage to push against the edges of our own digitally-enforced reality. But unlike Truman’s physical dome, our constraints are increasingly biological and psychological, woven into the very fabric of modern life through technocratic systems of control. The question isn’t whether we’re living in a Truman-like system – we demonstrably are. The question is whether we’ll recognize our digital dome before it becomes biological, and whether we’ll have the courage to sail toward its boundaries like Truman did.

  Individual Actions:

  • Implement strong privacy practices: encryption, data minimization, secure communications

  • Develop critical media literacy skills

  • Maintain analog alternatives to digital systems

  • Practice technological sabbaticals

  Family & Community Building:

  • Create local support networks independent of digital platforms

  • Teach children critical thinking and pattern recognition

  • Establish community-based economic alternatives

  • Build face-to-face relationships and regular gatherings

  Systemic Approaches:

  • Support and develop decentralized technologies

  • Create parallel systems for education and information sharing

  • Build alternative economic structures

  • Develop local food and energy independence

  Our daily resistance must occur through conscious engagement: using technology without being used by it, consuming entertainment while understanding its programming, and participating in digital platforms while maintaining privacy. We must learn to accept convenience without surrendering autonomy, follow experts while maintaining critical thinking, and embrace progress while preserving human values. Each choice becomes an act of conscious resistance.

  Even this analysis follows the blueprint it describes. Each system of control emerged through a consistent pattern: first a roadmap articulated by key thinkers, then a framework developed through institutions, finally an implementation that appears inevitable once completed. Just as Wells envisioned the World Brain before the Internet, and Rhodes designed the scholarship systems before global governance, the blueprint becomes visible only after understanding its components.

  The Choice Ahead

  Like Truman’s gradual awakening to the artificiality of his world, our recognition of these control systems develops through pattern recognition. And just as Truman had to overcome his programmed fears to sail toward the boundaries of his known world, we too must push against our comfortable technological constraints to maintain our humanity.

  The convergence of these control systems – from physical to psychological, from local to global, from mechanical to digital – represents the culmination of a century-long project of social engineering. What began with Edison’s hardware monopolies and Wells’ World Brain has evolved into an all-encompassing system of technological control, creating a digital Truman Show on a global scale.

  

  Yet knowledge of these systems provides the first step toward resistance. By understanding their development and recognizing their implementation, we can make conscious choices about our engagement with them. While we cannot completely escape the technocratic grid, we can maintain our humanity within it through conscious action and local connection.

  The future remains unwritten. Through understanding and deliberate action, we can help shape a world that preserves human agency within the technological web that increasingly defines our reality.

  

  This metaphorical staircase, reaching ever higher towards a seemingly divine ascent, reflects the technocratic vision of mankind’s transcendence through technological means. Yet true liberation lies not in climbing this constructed hierarchy, but in discovering the freedom that exists beyond its borders – the freedom to shape our own destiny, rather than have it dictated by an unseen hand. The choice before us is clear: will we remain Truman, accepting the limits of our fabricated world? Or will we take that final step, sailing toward an uncertain but ultimately self-determined future?

  *  *  *

  Thanks for reading Joshua Stylman! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support his work.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 23:25

• Portland May Cut 'Equity' Jobs Due To Budget Problems
  Portland May Cut ‘Equity’ Jobs Due To Budget Problems

  Authored by Matt Lamb via Headline USA,

  A top official in Portland said the Oregon city may need to cut “equity” roles due to a pending budget deficit.

  

  The city is forecasting a $27 million budget shortfall starting in the new fiscal year, according to its official website.

  This has led city administrator Michael Jordan to warn of cuts to “equity” jobs. That spells trouble for three new officer positions focused on “equity, communications, and engagement,” according to the Willamette Week.

  “As we proceed through the assessment process, it is possible that there will be cuts,” Jordan told the local news outlet. Other cuts include communications and engagement budgets.

  The city has regularly hired for DEI roles with nice salaries. For example, the Parks and Recreation Department advertised an “equity and inclusion coordinator” job that topped out at a $104,000-per-year salary. The job would research “racial equity and inclusion best practices” and provide advice to the bureau on “racial equity assessment tools.”

  This job should not be confused with a 2023 posting for an “equity and engagement planner” job in the bureau of planning and sustainability.

  That analyst position, with pay reaching nearly $150,000 annually, required a “subject matter expert on equity, diversity, and inclusion” who could implement “equity frameworks.”

  The hire would also conduct “racial equity” studies on “land use, climate justice, waste systems and community technology.”

  The Office of Equity and Human Rights is overseen by the city administrator.

  The city leans heavily into LGBT issues as well. The equity office publishes an “LGBTQIA2S+ Policy,” noting that 11% of city workers identified as being on the sexually divergent spectrum, and 15% did not select male or female when asked for their sex.

  The policy program “approaches LGBTQIA2S+ equity work with an intersectional lens, centering the most marginalized demographics within the community.”

  Portland is now led by Mayor Keith Wilson. For years, Ted Wheeler ran the city, largely letting homelessness run rampant and overseeing violent crime from domestic terror group Antifa.

  He also used pepper spray on his own citizen, whom he accused of harassing him in 2021 for not wearing a mask while inside.

  “I clearly informed him that he needed to back off,” Wheeler told police.

  “He did not do so … I pulled out my pepper spray and I sprayed him in the eyes,” Wheeler continued. “He seemed surprised, and backed off. He made a comment like, ‘I can’t believe you just pepper-sprayed me.’”

  However, Wheeler previously prohibited police from using tear gas during the city’s riots in 2020.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 22:35

• These Are The Most Expensive Countries In The World For Dating
  These Are The Most Expensive Countries In The World For Dating

  In a new study, Emisil researched the most expensive countries in the world for dating. They looked at the cost of dating across the globe, ranking countries based on the average annual expenses for singles.

  Switzerland tops the list for costly dating, with an annual average expense exceeding $6,643. This high figure is driven by premium prices for meals, cinema tickets, and taxi fares. Although Swiss singles go on fewer dates annually—around 50—their overall spending is unmatched. With an average monthly net salary of $6,500, these high costs are more manageable for Swiss residents.

  Denmark ranks second, with singles spending $3,592 annually. Dining plays a prominent role in its dating culture, as a two-course meal averages $98, the second-highest among the countries analyzed. Danish singles go on 48 dates yearly, closely matching the frequency seen in other high-ranking nations.

  Norway comes in third, with annual dating expenses of $3,279. While its three-course dinners average $88, one of the highest meal costs, Norway compensates with low taxi fares starting at $1.50. Singles in Norway date 47 times a year, slightly less frequently than in Denmark.

  Belgium is fourth, with annual dating costs exceeding $2,000. Meal prices are slightly lower than in Norway, but taxi fares start higher at $2.60. Belgian singles also average 48 dates yearly, aligning with Denmark but at a more economical total cost.

  The Netherlands ranks fifth, with an annual dating expenditure of $1,000 and a single date costing $90. Dutch singles enjoy a high frequency of 60 dates annually, supported by moderate meal and entertainment prices. With over 1,000 cinema screens, there’s no shortage of options for outings.

  Finland takes sixth place, with singles spending $2,838 annually and $90 per date. Finnish singles date 48 times a year, benefiting from relatively low meal costs averaging $57.

  

  Ireland ranks seventh, with annual dating costs of $3,091 and single-date expenses of $87. Despite similar per-date costs to the U.S. and UK, Irish singles date only 36 times a year, reflecting cultural or financial differences.

  The United States ranks eighth, with singles spending $4,507 annually on 84 dates—the highest frequency among all countries. With an average date costing $87.20, dating is relatively affordable. The U.S. also boasts over 40,000 cinema screens, offering abundant entertainment options.

  The United Kingdom ranks ninth, with annual dating costs of $3,153. At $86 per date, costs are slightly lower than in the U.S., but with average monthly salaries of $3,069, affordability is a greater challenge. Like Americans, British singles average 84 dates yearly, the highest frequency on the list.

  Australia rounds out the top ten, with one of the lowest annual dating costs among high-income nations at $3,570. A single date averages $82, with affordable three-course dinners costing $75. Australian singles date 48 times a year, balancing affordability and social activity.

  An Emisil’s spokesperson said: “Our research on dating costs worldwide shows some pretty interesting trends. Swiss singles spend the most – about $6,600 a year on dating – but it’s Americans and Brits who are out there dating the most, averaging around 84 dates yearly.”

  They continued: “Here’s what’s caught my eye: because dating is expensive in a country, it doesn’t mean people date less. It’s more about how their salaries match local dating costs and what’s normal in their culture. This tells us much about how different societies view and value dating today.”

  The study “analyzed data from 87 countries, examining factors such as the frequency of dating (surveyed among 500–2,000 participants per country), average post-tax monthly income, meal costs (three-course dinners at mid-range restaurants and inexpensive solo meals), movie ticket prices for two, and taxi starting fares.”

  “Countries were ranked by total annual dating costs, offering insights into global dating affordability and cultural spending patterns,” Emilsil wrote. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 22:10

• "Your Credibility With Me Is About None": CNN Trial Goes From Bad To Worse
  “Your Credibility With Me Is About None”: CNN Trial Goes From Bad To Worse

  Authored by Jonathan Turley,

  In following the defamation trial against CNN by veteran Zachary Young, we have previously (here, here, and here) marveled at how bad things were going for the network. 

  It appears that they are getting even worse.

  This has been a brutal week as CNN figures, including host Jake Tapper, took the stand.

  If “this is CNN,” the judge (and possibly the jury) are not liking what they are seeing.The report at the heart of the case aired on CNN’s “The Lead with Jake Tapper” on Nov. 11, 2021, and was shared on social media and (a different version on) CNN’s website.

  

  In the segment, Tapper told his audience ominously how CNN correspondent Alex Marquardt discovered that “Afghans trying to get out of the country face a black market full of promises, demands of exorbitant fees, and no guarantee of safety or success.”

  Marquardt piled on in the segment, claiming that “desperate Afghans are being exploited” and need to pay “exorbitant, often impossible amounts” to flee the country. He then named Young and his company as an example of that startling claim.The evidence included messages from Marquardt that he wanted to “nail this Zachary Young mf**ker” and thought the story would be Young’s “funeral.”

  After promising to “nail” Young, CNN editor Matthew Philips responded: “gonna hold you to that cowboy!”

  Likewise, CNN senior editor Fuzz Hogan described Young as “a shit.”

  As is often done by media, CNN allegedly gave Young only two hours to respond before the story ran. It is a typical ploy of the press to claim that they waited for a response while giving the target the smallest possible window.

  In this case, Young was able to respond in the short time and Marquardt messaged a colleague, “f**king Young just texted.”

  In the last week, Tapper was seen on video by the jury and was mocked for claiming under oath that he “doesn’t pay attention to ratings,” a claim that would make him unique as a network host. Critics hammered Tapper by showing repeated clips where he discussed ratings.

  However, the most damaging testimony may have come from top producers who told the jurors that they opposed the modest apology given to Young on air. Since Young seemed to do well before the jury, the testimony of senior editor Fuzz Hogan, CNN correspondent Alex Marquardt, CNN producer Michael Conte, CNN’s executive vice president of editorial Virginia Moseley, and CNN supervising producer Michael Callahan undermined any effort to portray the network as seeking to amend a wrong or reduce damage to Young.

  Arguably, the worst moment came with an argument by CNN’s lead attorney, David Axelrod.

  Axelrod introduced a document that he claimed was a smoking gun and showed that Young was a liar. Pointing dramatically at Young and waiving the document in the air, Axelrod declared that he had the proof:

  “Plaintiff’s entire case, sitting right there, is that after the publications, he couldn’t get any work…Mr. Young knew, when he filed this lawsuit that he had entered into a new consulting agreement with a government contractor one month after CNN’s publication. This entire lawsuit was a fraud on this court. It was a fraud on CNN. This man knew it. I don’t know what they know. But when his came up in discovery, CNN’s counsel asked Mr. Young about the Helios connection, and he completely lied in his deposition. Over and over again, he made up some incredible ruse that Helios just had his security clearance because it was a company that held security clearances. It makes no sense. He knew at that time that he had a consulting agreement with Helios Global and he didn’t disclose it. It was an outright lie.”

  However, it turned out that the document merely was Young’s application to maintain his security clearance.

  Young’s attorney, Vel Freedman, later laid waste to CNN. He told the court that Young had lost his security clearance back in 2022 and that he hadn’t been aware of that until he double-checked after his testimony in the case. Freedman asked for the right to present a witness who would testify on the issue and Axelrod objected. Judge Henry had had enough and blew up at CNN.

  He read back Axelrod’s comments and said “You called him a liar multiple times there.”

  He told Axelrod that he owed an apology to the plaintiff.

  After telling CNN that “this isn’t Kindergarten,” he added “Right now, your credibility with me, Mr. Axelrod, is about none.”

  That is never a good thing to hear from a judge.

  Axelrod apologized but the damage is clearly considerable.

  The most chilling aspect from a litigation perspective? Axelrod replaced the earlier lead counsel who also imploded in court over ill-considered arguments.

  None of this bodes well for the network. Alienating the judge is obviously never good, but it also could have a material impact if there is an award that CNN wants reduced by a order of remittitur. In addition, having top producers expressing a lack of regret and even opposition to the on-air apology could push such damages higher for a jury. Both sides are arguing that “this is CNN,” but these moments are building a more negative view of what that is.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 21:45

• The Kids Aren't Alright: Gen Z Admits They Don't Know How To Change Lightbulbs
  The Kids Aren’t Alright: Gen Z Admits They Don’t Know How To Change Lightbulbs

  In case you needed any additional confirmation that the human race continues to devolve, here’s a new one for you.

  New data shows that many in Gen Z struggle with basic DIY tasks like changing a lightbulb, according to a new report from the New York Post.

  Andy Turbefield of Halfords, a UK-based motoring and cycling retailer, said: “The ability to do basic, practical tasks is being lost amongst younger generations.”

  “They simply haven’t really had to [do things for themselves],” said Yamalis Diaz, an NYU Langone psychologist.

  She continued: “So much of their (and all of our) lives are automated, convenient and outsourced, which today’s generation of young people have benefited from way more than past generations. So, it makes complete sense that Gen Z simply doesn’t know how to do as much with regard to non-tech or independent tasks.”

  

  The Post report says that a Halfords survey of 2,000 adults found nearly 25% of Gen Zers don’t know how to change a ceiling lightbulb, often citing safety concerns like hot bulbs or ladder risks. Instead of attempting the task, many prefer to “GOTDIT” — Get Others To Do It.

  This adds to the narrative of Gen Z’s reluctance for DIY, with some opting to pay professionals for minor tasks rather than tackling them themselves.

  Halfords analysts found that Gen Z spends over $1,500 annually hiring professionals for basic household tasks, compared to $470 for Gen X and $300 for boomers.

  Given their lack of DIY skills, it may be money well spent. Many Gen Zers also rely on parents for chores like car cleaning, with less than half knowing how to add air to a tire or replace a windshield wiper blade.

  Finally, the Post wrote that nearly 30% of Gen Zers can’t identify a flathead screwdriver, and 21% don’t recognize a wrench. Shockingly, 1 in 10 would call a pro just to hang a picture.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 21:20

• Dysautonomia: Symptoms, Causes, Treatments, And Natural Approaches
  Dysautonomia: Symptoms, Causes, Treatments, And Natural Approaches

  Authored by Mercura Wang via The Epoch Times,

  Dysautonomia, also known as autonomic nervous system disorders, refers to a group of medical conditions causing dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system (ANS), which controls essential bodily functions such as heart rate, blood pressure, digestion, and temperature regulation. Individuals with these disorders struggle to maintain normal regulation of one or more of these systems.

  

  More than 70 million people worldwide are affected by different types of dysautonomia.

  What Are the Symptoms and Signs of Dysautonomia?

  The ANS is a part of the peripheral nervous system that controls involuntary bodily functions, such as heart rate, blood pressure, digestion, respiration, and body temperature regulation. It consists of two main branches: the sympathetic nervous system and the parasympathetic nervous system.

  The sympathetic nervous system is responsible for the “fight-or-flight” response by increasing heart rate, blood pressure, and energy expenditure during stress or danger.

  

  The parasympathetic nervous system is responsible for “rest-and-digest” functions by promoting relaxation, slowing the heart rate, and aiding digestion and energy conservation.

  The ANS helps maintain balance (homeostasis) in the body by automatically adjusting these functions according to internal and external conditions. Dysautonomia occurs when the ANS malfunctions, causing the systems to fail to regulate the aforementioned processes properly, thus leading to various symptoms and signs.

  Dysautonomia symptoms and signs can be acute and reversible or chronic and progressive. Common symptoms include those listed below.

  Orthostatic Hypotension

  Orthostatic (upright posture) hypotension is the most prominent symptom of dysautonomia. It results from a sudden decrease in brain blood supply when moving from a seated or supine position to standing, leading to the following symptoms:

  • Dizziness
  • Lightheadedness
  • Fainting
  • Dim or blurry vision
  • Weakness
  • Unsteady gait
  • Slurred speech
  • Exercise-induced syncope (fainting)

  Urinary Dysfunction

  • Increased urinary frequency
  • Nocturia (the need to urinate frequently during the night)
  • Urinary urgency
  • Stress incontinence

  Sexual Dysfunction

  • Impotence
  • Loss of sex drive
  • Dry or retrograde ejaculation

  Gastrointestinal Problems

  • Intermittent diarrhea
  • Explosive diarrhea (in severe cases)
  • Nocturnal diarrhea
  • Rectal incontinence
  • Constipation
  • Abdominal pain
  • Acid reflux
  • Heartburn

  Cardiovascular Issues

  • Heart palpitations
  • Chest discomfort
  • High or low heart rate
  • High or low blood pressure
  • Blood pooling, which is when blood cannot return to the heart properly and collects in the veins

  Neurological Problems

  • Mood swings
  • Anxiety
  • Forgetfulness
  • Migraines

  Other Symptoms and Signs

  • Abnormal sweating
  • Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
  • Drooling or dry mouth
  • Vertigo
  • Dry or watery eyes
  • Trouble swallowing
  • Clammy or pale skin

  What Causes Dysautonomia?

  Dysautonomia falls into two categories: primary and secondary. Primary dysautonomias result from genetic or degenerative diseases affecting the brain and nervous system, while secondary dysautonomias arise from injuries or other underlying conditions. The latter may be linked to medications (e.g., first-generation antipsychotics), brain trauma, or conditions such as diabetes, sarcoidosis, and certain autoimmune diseases (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, and Sjögren’s syndrome).

  Idiopathic dysautonomias are autonomic nervous system disorders with an unknown underlying cause.

  Environmental factors such as medical conditions, vaccinations, and medications can cause secondary dysautonomia. Some of these include:

  • Viral infections: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), human T-lymphotropic virus, herpes viruses, flavivirus, enterovirus 71, and lyssavirus infections can cause autonomic dysfunction.
  • Lyme disease: Lyme disease can lead to the development of postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) and other forms of dysautonomia.
  • Diabetes: Diabetes can cause diabetic autonomic neuropathy.
  • Parkinson’s disease: The findings of a 2019 study indicate that autonomic dysfunction is linked to disrupted white matter, impaired brain connectivity, and cognitive decline in newly diagnosed patients with Parkinson’s disease.
  • Myalgic encephalomyelitis: This is also known as chronic fatigue syndrome.
  • Long COVID: A 2022 study found that symptoms of dysautonomia are common in people with long COVID. The most affected areas of dysautonomia include digestive issues, problems with sweating and other secretions, and difficulty standing up without feeling dizzy or faint. Older patients also tend to experience more orthostatic intolerance, which is when standing up causes changes such as a drop in blood pressure.
  • COVID-19 vaccination: As per a 2023 study, some people experience chronic fatigue and dysautonomia after receiving the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine, a condition referred to as post-acute COVID-19 vaccination syndrome (PACVS). Researchers found that PACVS patients who had symptoms of dysautonomia for at least five months after vaccination showed different blood markers compared to healthy individuals. These differences included higher levels of certain antibodies and interleukin-6 (IL-6), which can help distinguish PACVS from a normal postvaccination response. The exact number of vaccinated individuals affected by PACVS is unknown, but current estimates suggest an incidence of about 0.02 percent.

  What Are the Types of Dysautonomia?

  Currently, there are at least 15 known types of dysautonomia. One individual may experience multiple types, with overlapping symptoms across them.

  Ten of the more prevalent types include:

  • Vasovagal syncope: Vasovagal syncope, also known as neurocardiogenic syncope, is the most common form of dysautonomia, affecting 22 percent of Americans. While many experience only occasional fainting spells, severe cases can involve fainting multiple times a day. Vasovagal syncope is a type of fainting caused by an abnormal or exaggerated response of the body’s automatic functions to stimuli such as standing up or strong emotions. The exact cause isn’t fully understood, but it involves changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and activation of specific heart fibers.
  • Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS): POTS is characterized by an abnormally rapid increase in heart rate when moving from a sitting or lying down position to standing. It is one of the more common types of dysautonomia. Before COVID-19, POTS affected about 1 percent of teenagers and between 1 to 3 million Americans overall. Some sources suggest that this number has increased by 1 million to 3 million since the pandemic. For more details on the condition, please refer to The Essential Guide to POTS.
  • Orthostatic and postprandial hypotension: Orthostatic hypotension is a sudden drop in blood pressure upon standing, leading to reduced blood flow to the brain. It often causes dizziness, lightheadedness, or fainting. Orthostatic hypotension affects approximately 6 percent of the general population and is more common in older adults, affecting 10 percent to 30 percent of this age group. Similarly, postprandial hypotension is when blood pressure drops suddenly after a meal. During digestion, the body increases blood flow to the stomach and intestines, causing the heart to pump faster and blood vessels to constrict to maintain overall blood pressure. However, in people with postprandial hypotension, the heart doesn’t speed up enough, and blood vessels fail to constrict properly, leading to a drop in blood pressure. It affects around 40 percent of older adults over 65.
  • Diabetic autonomic neuropathy: Diabetic autonomic neuropathy is a common form of dysautonomia, affecting 20 percent of individuals with diabetes. It is a severe diabetes complication linked to a higher risk of cardiovascular mortality.
  • Multiple system atrophy (MSA): MSA is a rare, fatal neurodegenerative disorder affecting adults over 40. It shares similarities with Parkinson’s disease but progresses more rapidly, often leaving patients bedridden within two years of diagnosis and leading to death within five to 10 years. Approximately 350,000 people worldwide are affected by MSA. Its cause is largely unknown, but the condition is associated with the deterioration and atrophy of specific brain areas, including the cerebellum, basal ganglia, and brainstem, along with the accumulation of alpha-synuclein, a protein involved in nerve cell communication.
  • Familial dysautonomia: Also known as Riley-Day syndrome, familial dysautonomia is a rare inherited disorder that affects the autonomic and sensory nervous systems. It causes unstable blood pressure, reduced sensitivity to pain and temperature, and a lack of tears when crying. Individuals with familial dysautonomia may experience an autonomic crisis characterized by sudden high blood pressure, elevated heart rate, and vomiting or retching. Familial dysautonomia is caused by a genetic mutation in the ELP1 gene (also known as the IKBKAP gene), which produces a protein found in various cells, including brain cells.
  • Baroreflex failure: Baroreflex failure occurs when the body’s baroreflex system, which regulates blood pressure, fails. This system sends signals to the brain to adjust blood pressure by activating the parasympathetic nervous system to lower heart rate when blood pressure is high and deactivating the sympathetic nervous system to reduce heart rate and dilate blood vessels. When blood pressure is too low, the opposite occurs. As a result of baroreflex failure, blood pressure fluctuates between being too high and too low, causing symptoms such as dizziness, fainting, headaches, sweating, and skin flushing. It is a rare condition often caused by neck trauma from surgery or radiation therapy for cancer, although in some cases, the cause is unknown.
  • Pure autonomic failure (PAF): PAF, also known as Bradbury-Eggleston syndrome, is a rare form of dysautonomia characterized by the degeneration of autonomic nervous system cells. Its hallmark symptom is severe orthostatic hypotension, which leads to dizziness, fainting, and syncope. It more commonly affects men and typically occurs in middle-aged to older adults. As per estimation, fewer than 5,000 Americans live with this condition. PAF is linked to the abnormal buildup of alpha-synuclein, which is also seen in conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, MSA, and dementia with Lewy bodies.
  • Inappropriate sinus tachycardia (IST): IST is a chronic condition where the heart maintains a normal rhythm but beats excessively fast, with a resting heart rate above 100 beats per minute (bpm), compared to the normal range of 60 to 100 bpm. It affects approximately 1 percent of the middle-aged population, with a higher prevalence in females. The cause of IST is unknown. One theory suggests that the sinoatrial node may have an abnormality, or the individual might be overly sensitive to adrenaline, a hormone that increases heart rate.
  • Autoimmune autonomic ganglionopathy (AAG): AAG is a rare form of dysautonomia wherein the immune system attacks receptors in the autonomic ganglia, a part of the peripheral ANS. It can present with either rapid or progressive symptom onset and is often linked to high levels of ganglionic acetylcholine receptor antibodies (g-AChR antibodies). AAG affects individuals of all ages and both sexes, with about 100 cases diagnosed annually in the United States.

  Who Is More Likely to Develop Dysautonomia?

  The following factors put a person more at risk of certain types of dysautonomia:

  • Age: POTS and vasovagal syncope is often more common among teens and young adults, causing 85 percent of fainting instances in people under 40. In people aged 50 and older, dysautonomia is usually associated with a neurodegenerative disease.
  • Sex: POTS is most commonly observed in women of childbearing age, typically between 15 and 50 years old.
  • Ethnicity: People of Ashkenazi Jewish descent are at a higher risk of dysautonomia, especially familial dysautonomia, which affects almost exclusively this population.
  • Diabetes: Diabetics are prone to developing diabetic autonomic neuropathy.
  • Alcoholism: Excessive drinking is known to affect the ANS.
  • Injury or surgery: An event that damages the ANS or brain can lead to dysautonomia.
  • Vitamin deficiencies: Examples include vitamin B12 and vitamin D deficiencies.
  • Deconditioning: Deconditioning is the loss of physical function due to lack of activity, extended bed rest, or a very sedentary lifestyle.
  • Certain medical conditions: These conditions include amyloidosis, celiac disease, mitochondrial diseases, mast cell disorders, complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), various autoimmune diseases, and Sjögren’s syndrome.

  

  Read the rest here…

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 20:55

• Where Are Waymo's Robotaxis Today?
  Where Are Waymo’s Robotaxis Today?

  Waymo operates hundreds of robotaxis, completing tens of thousands of driverless taxi rides per week through its commercial operations in San Francisco (launched in August 2023), Los Angeles (launched in March 2024), and Phoenix (launched in 2018/19). The Alphabet-owned startup plans to launch commercial services in three additional markets: Austin and Atlanta later this year and Miami in 2026.

  

  Goldman’s Eric Sheridan and Ben Miller provide clients with a Waymo robotaxi update: “Where is Waymo Today?” 

  Here’s more from the analysts:

  Waymo Could be in 10 US Cities by the end of 2025

  Waymo started in 2009 as Google’s self-driving car project and launched the world’s first commercial autonomous ride-hailing service in the Metro Phoenix area in 2018 (with fully autonomous rides starting in 2019).

  Fast-forward to today, Waymo now serves 175k paid rides per week (as of Dec 2024) up significantly from 10k in May 2023, only ~18 months prior. This ramp has resulted in over 4mm fully autonomous rides in 2024 (and over 5mm cumulative rides since first launch). Commercial operations are live in 3 US markets (Phoenix, San Francisco, LA) with 3 more market launches announced across 2025 (Austin and Atlanta) and 2026 (Miami) for a total of 6 announced markets through 2026.

  GOOGL expects that Waymo could be in 10 US markets by the end of 2025 (likely with live commercial operations in a subset) based on comments made by GOOGL CEO at an industry conference in December 2024. Waymo also announced its first international road trip in Tokyo in early 2025 (the vehicles will initially be driven manually to map key areas of the city).

  The analysts provided clients with a visual timeline of Waymo’s rollout through 2026.

  

  Waymo users have surged in the past 18 months… 

  

  The broadening of Waymo’s commercial autonomous ride-hailing service will be met with backlash and concerns over traffic incidents. We documented this phenomenon (here & here & here). 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 20:30

• American Conservatives Should Focus On Reform And Restoration
  American Conservatives Should Focus On Reform And Restoration

  Authored by Peter Berkowitz via RealClearPolitics,

  A “New Right” has taken shape over the last few years that tends to share the conviction that the American experiment in ordered liberty confronts a monumental crisis. Encompassing national conservatives, common-good conservatives, and postliberal conservatives, this New Right sees pervasive moral, political, and spiritual decline. Only prompt, decisive, and sweeping action, so the New Right argument goes, can save the United States from the self-destruction long underway and in danger of careening, if it has not already, beyond the point of no return. Many pin their hopes on President-elect Donald Trump to at least slow the rate of decline.

  

  Members of the New Right are hardly the first to discern something profoundly amiss within the West and particularly within the modern tradition of freedom out of which the United States sprang. Intellectuals have been diagnosing the decline of the West – and writing its postmortem – at least since Rousseau’s mid-18th century “Discourse on the Arts and Sciences.” The French philosopher decried the educated urban elites of the day whose hypocrisy and hollowness, he contended, betrayed the common good. After Rousseau came the romantics, Marx, Nietzsche, Spengler, the Frankfurt School, some traditionalist American conservatives, postmodernists, and others. From the left and the right, they excoriated Enlightenment liberalism, anticipated its collapse, and envisaged alternatives.

  New Right intellectuals mock – for, as they like to say, not knowing what time it is – Americans who cling to the path of reform. Presuming an essentially well-functioning government and a healthy society, reform involves working within the established system. It takes account of changing circumstances and applies new insights to adjust laws and recalibrate policies. If, however, you believe as do many on the New Right that your country totters on the edge of a precipice, reform seems feeble and beside the point.

  Proponents of restoration accept that bold measures must be undertaken to avert disaster, but they think that the original regime and the moral assumptions out of which it emerged remain sound. The problem, restorers maintain, is that neglect or malice has deformed basic political institutions and has corroded citizens’ attachment to the unwritten norms, habits and dispositions, and formal principles that sustain the regime. Consequently, major efforts must be undertaken to reclaim and restate the nation’s constitutional traditions, and to educate citizens about the regime’s structure, vital operations, and sustaining opinions and forms of conduct. In the United States, National Review conservatives, Straussians, numerous old-time neoconservatives, and many Claremont Institute conservatives have long espoused a return to and renewal of America’s founding principles and the best in the nation’s constitutional traditions. At the same time, they have endeavored to work within the system to carry out reforms that both answer to the needs of the moment and conform to the underlying structure of American constitutional government.

   The extreme response to political crisis is regime change or revolution. Some regimes are impervious to reform because of their advanced decay and are ill-suited to restoration because the social and political pathologies from which they suffer stem from inherent defects in their fundamental principles and basic institutions. Proponents of regime change or revolution maintain that since the United States has been exposed as rotten to the core and irremediably hostile to citizens’ security and flourishing, its constitutional order must be brushed aside or overthrown and replaced with another. Regime change or revolution may be a minority view on the New Right, but some of its best-known figures champion it. Sometimes they do so openly as in the case of University of Notre Dame professor of political science Patrick Deneen. In other cases, they do not come right out and say so but indulge in extravagant rhetoric and inflammatory innuendo that excites, especially among young conservatives, revolutionary rage and stimulates ambitions for regime change.

  A proud member of the New Right – or the “New Conservative Movement,” as he labels it in his spirited new book – Kevin D. Roberts believes both that America is in grave danger and that reform and restoration must play an essential role in saving the day. In “Dawn’s Early Light: Taking Back Washington to Save America,” Roberts describes a nation beset by an elite – “the Party of Destruction” – that is resolutely hostile to tradition and, in the name of unlimited freedom, aspires “to abolish the existing order.” He calls on “the Party of Creation,” which defends “the God-given natural order,” to beat back elite hegemony – in government bureaucracy, media, education, entertainment, corporate HR, and diplomacy and national security. To that end, he advances several ambitious and well-considered reforms. These focus on strengthening the family, rescuing education, invigorating the economy and revitalizing the middle class in particular, and orienting foreign affairs around the threat to American freedom and prosperity posed by the Chinese Communist Party. Roberts argues that these reforms must be informed by, and undertaken amid a restoration of, America’s founding commitment to individual liberty.

  He also flirts with fashionable New Right revolutionary tropes, prominent among them the urgency of “radical action” and the need to destroy to build anew. He would do better without this flirtation, as it undercuts his dedication to salutary reform within the confines of American constitutional government.

  Appointed in 2021 president of the Heritage Foundation and of Heritage Action for America, Roberts arrived in Washington with a rich and varied background in education and public policy. His book draws on his experience as well as his study. Growing up in Cajun Louisiana in a close family that handled its share of hardships, he acquired a deep appreciation of the classic American combination of traditional views about family and faith and love of American liberty. He earned a Ph.D. in history from the University of Texas, taught history at the collegiate level, served as president of Wyoming Catholic College, and led the Texas Public Policy Foundation. Much of his book describes, with a refreshing and self-professed Reaganite optimism, the combining of reform with restoration that his career exemplifies.

  Yet Roberts’ bleak assessment of contemporary America seems to justify revolutionary action. America is going “up in flames,” he argues, owing to “a conspiracy against nature – against ordered, civilized societies, against common sense and normal people – orchestrated by a network of political, corporate, and cultural elites who share a set of interests quite apart from those of ordinary Americans.” Embracing both left and right, “they are known as the Uniparty.”

  It is not enough, he contends, for conservatives to adopt defensive measures against the Uniparty’s conquests and depredations: “To escape our current darkness, restore America’s civic life, and take back our country for good, conservatives can’t merely continue putting out fires; we must be brave enough to go on the offense, strike the match, and start a long, controlled burn.” His lengthy list of institutions that “need to be burned” (emphasis in original) starts with every Ivy League college and university, the FBI, and the New York Times.

  Noting occasionally that he is speaking metaphorically, Roberts urges the application to politics of a practice common to the management of nature. To keep forests healthy – and often to prevent a larger wildfire from raging out of control – well-trained experts under carefully supervised conditions sometimes burn down a part of the forest to save the whole. Roberts, however, gives no reason based in theory or drawn from experience and history to suppose that politicians and political activists – those on the right any more than those on the left – have the foresight, know-how, and tools to control political fires that they deliberately ignite. While decisive action will always be a concomitant of good government, politics is not a science and the management of nature rarely provides reliable prescriptions for governing a nation.

  Notwithstanding his enthusiasm for controlled burns and contained destruction, much of Roberts’ book elaborates policies that, in the spirit of Edmund Burke, simultaneously conserve and improve. Especially welcome as the Republican Party prepares to assume control of both the legislative and executive branches is Roberts’ contention – epitomizing Burkean balancing – that American conservatives must combine their big plans for repairing America with respect for the Constitution’s limits on government power.

  Such balancing means, for example, that in restructuring the economy to serve rather than to subordinate the family, conservatives must honor not merely tradition and faith but the variety of American traditions and faiths. It means conservatives must introduce miseducated young people to America’s precious inheritance and inspire in them an appreciation for America’s great experiment in ordered liberty but without countering indoctrination of the left with indoctrination of the right. And it means that in rising to the threat to American freedom posed by the Chinese Communist Party, conservatives must avoid the temptation – to which many on both sides have succumbed – to treat approximately half the country as an enemy to be defeated rather than as fellow citizens to rally to a common enterprise.

  The very gravity of the challenges faced by the United States requires that conservatives set aside revolutionary outrage and dreams of regime change for the hard and high-minded work that combines reform and restoration.

  Peter Berkowitz is the Tad and Dianne Taube senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University. From 2019 to 2021, he served as director of the Policy Planning Staff at the U.S. State Department. His writings are posted at PeterBerkowitz.com and he can be followed on X @BerkowitzPeter.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 20:05

• Washington Post Cartoonist Arrested For Possession Of Child Pornography
  Washington Post Cartoonist Arrested For Possession Of Child Pornography

  It’s happening again.  A prominent California-based comic strip creator, cartoonist and author has been arrested on suspicion of possession and creating child pornography.  The incident is added to a growing list of arrests of establishment news employees and syndicated content creators for child abuse in the past couple of years.

  Darrin Bell, 49, who is the first Black American winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Editorial Cartooning, was arrested Wednesday morning at his south Sacramento home by Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office investigators. Deputies had served a search warrant against Bell following an investigation by the Sacramento Valley Internet Crimes Against Children Detectives task force.

  

  In a search of Bell’s home, investigators found 134 videos of child pornography linked to an account owned and controlled by Bell as well as computer generated/artificial intelligence child pornography, authorities said.

  Darrin Bell is best known for his Candorville comic strips and other work published by the Washington Post injecting far-left ideology, race grifting, pro-illegal immigration views and LGBT issues into his content.  He is decidedly anti-Trump and anti-conservative.  Bell often attacked conservatives who dared to criticize the political left’s habit of child grooming; from ideological grooming to sexualized grooming.  He commonly compared conservatives to Nazis in reaction to the removal of sexualized gender propaganda in public school libraries. 

  

  Now it seems we know why he was so offended by conservative efforts to protect children from grooming propganda.

  

  Establishment media outlets have been hit with a steady string of employee arrests in the past couple years involving child abuse and pornography and the trend doesn’t seem to be slowing down any time soon.  One might begin to think that corporate news is a wretched hive of scum and villainy that actually attracts pedophiles, but how could these things happen within the halls of such “prestigious” organizations?

  This topic hit the mainstream aggressively in 2023 with the release of the movie ‘Sound Of Freedom’, based on the true story of an independent investigation which led to the exposure of an international child sex trafficking ring.  After the release of the film, hundreds of journalists and numerous corporate platforms attacked the movie relentlessly, even though the film had no political messaging to speak of.  This behavior left everyone wondering where all the hostility was coming from? 

  Doesn’t everyone agree that child sex abuse is wrong?  Well, almost everyone, except pedophiles…and establishment journalists.       

  “Check their hard drive” is becoming a motto for the media industry at large, and for good reason.  Darrin Bell is being held on $1 million bail and is scheduled to appear in court Friday.     

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 19:40

• Joe Biden's Bizarro World Of Foreign Policy "Achievements"
  Joe Biden’s Bizarro World Of Foreign Policy “Achievements”

  Authored by Victor Davis Hanson via American Greatness,

  Departing President Joe Biden offered a farewell brag this week to his State Department about how his tenure had improved America’s stature abroad. In his now accustomed weird mix of whispering and fiery shouting, Biden apparently felt he had to lie or mislead about almost every one of his “achievements.”

  

  Yet to the extent that anything improved abroad on his watch—the weakening of Iran or the near destruction of Hamas and Hezbollah – it was due despite, not because of, Biden.

  Biden, bowing to election year political pressure, did all he could to restrain and block Israeli retaliations to the October 7 massacres.

  Only after he was repeatedly proven wrong does he now shamelessly take credit for what Israel ironically achieved by ignoring his own threats directed at Israel.

  Biden is correct only that Iran is “weaker than it’s been in decades.”

  But Tehran was aided, not hurt, by Biden’s nonstop efforts to lift sanctions, to allow Iran to make billions in oil revenues, to pay the theocracy billions of dollars in hostage ransom, and to beg the mullahs to reenter the ill-starred Iran deal. Everything Biden did makes it much harder for Israel to survive.

  So, Iran is now weakened only because Israel ignored Biden’s nonstop ankle-biting and finger-shaking not to retaliate to Iranian aggression.

  Instead, the Netanyahu government systematically destroyed Iranian air defenses after killing most of Iran’s foreign terrorist operatives.

  Biden referenced the end of the Assad regime in Syria, but it imploded not due to any effort by Biden. It was overwhelmed instead only after the Israeli decimation of Hezbollah and humiliation of Iran—coupled with the election victory of Donald Trump—that encouraged Assad’s enemies to attack a now isolated and weakened regime.

  Biden is also taking credit for rumors that Hamas might release its hostages, who have been held in a subterranean labyrinth since October 7.

  But why, with less than a week left in his tenure, did Biden believe Hamas might begin releasing the hostages when even his own Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, has criticized the administration for spending 16 months pressuring Israel, which only emboldened Hamas’s stonewalling?

  Much more likely, the election of Donald Trump and his threat to unleash terrible retribution on Hamas (and implicitly on Iran) had prompted the terrorists’ tardy willingness to negotiate a release.

  Of the horrific scramble from Afghanistan—the greatest humiliation of the US military in a half-century that cost the lives of 13 Marines—Biden boasted: “[I am] the first president in decades who’s not leaving a war in Afghanistan to his successor.”

  Think of his warped logic: Biden does not leave a war to his successor only because he fled in humiliation and lost it.

  Biden also took credit for saving Ukraine from Russia. But he conveniently omitted why Russia invaded in the first place.

  Had Biden not destroyed American deterrence by fleeing Kabul and leaving behind billions of dollars in abandoned U.S. military equipment, had he not claimed, prior to the Russian invasion, that his reaction to Putin’s likely aggression would hinge on whether it was “a minor incursion,” then the Russians might never have invaded at all.

  Vladimir Putin grabbed Crimea and the Donbass in 2014 during the Obama-Biden administration. He later sought to swallow the entire country with an attack on Kyiv in 2022 on Biden’s watch.

  However, Putin stayed within his borders only during one of the last four administrations—Donald Trump’s.

  Biden crowed that he accomplished all these misadventures without the use of force—“We have not gone to war to make these things happen.”

  But Biden did more than any other recent president to weaken the U.S. military. Under his tenure, the Pentagon suffered a real reduction in its budget. And it never quite recovered from the Afghanistan debacle.

  Annually, the military now comes up 40,000 recruits short due to Biden’s draconian vaccination requirements, its new woke mandates, and its constant false accusations of “white rage” and “white privilege” in the ranks—libels that prompted a Pentagon internal investigation that found no such racism.

  China was never more bellicose than during Biden’s presidency. It serially threatened Taiwan, used cyber warfare to bully the U.S., brazenly expropriated U.S. military technology, and without worry sent a spy balloon to traverse the U.S. with impunity.

  Biden’s open border saw more than 10 million illegal entries, among them thousands of Chinese nationals. Meanwhile, Chinese investors were freed to systematically buy up thousands of acres of America’s farmland adjacent to sensitive US military bases and installations.

  Add it all up, and Biden would have done better to have just kept quiet and departed his failed presidency in shame.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 19:15

• These Are The Top Companies Using H-1B Visas In 2024
  These Are The Top Companies Using H-1B Visas In 2024

  In December, Elon Musk called for more temporary foreign workers under the H-1B visa program, which is fueling a debate among Republican voters.

  For decades, tech companies have relied significantly on high-skilled tech workers under this program.

  This graphic, via Visual Capitalist’s Dorothy Neufeld, shows the top companies by number of approved H-1B beneficiaries, based on data from the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

  

  Big Tech Rules the Pack

  As the table below shows, more than half of all H-1B visa beneficiaries in 2024 were seen among the leading petitioning companies in 2024, largely focused in the tech sector:

  

  Data as of September 30, 2024.

  For the past five years, Amazon has been the top company by number of approved H-1B visas, mainly consisting of engineers and tech jobs.

  Today, many big tech firms have significant resources to hire lawyers which aid in the application process. This often gives them an advantage in the lottery system, which grants visas that are typically oversubscribed past the annual cap. In fact, many major tech companies will apply for more than they need.

  Ranking in second is Infosys, a multinational IT outsourcing firm based in India. Like Infosys, India-based Tata Consultancy Services relies on the H-1B visa program. In 2024, it generated more than 50% of its revenues in North America, its largest market.

  While tech companies tend to apply for higher-paying roles, IT outsourcing firms typically submit applications for less-senior positions. For instance, the median H-1B salary at Microsoft is $160,000 in contrast with $82,000 at Tata Consultancy Services in 2024.

  Overall, the H-1B visa program has been shown to have a multitude of benefits. Big companies utilizing H-1Bs have been shown to have higher revenue, enhanced innovation, and longer survival rates. Going further, it has driven more U.S. patents and higher productivity across the U.S. economy.

  To learn more about this topic from a U.S. labor market perspective, check out this graphic on the fastest growing jobs over the next decade.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 18:50

• Is The Catalyst For The Next Financial Crisis… Homeowners Insurance?
  Is The Catalyst For The Next Financial Crisis… Homeowners Insurance?

  Authored by John Rubino via substack,

  In October, two brutal hurricanes hit the US southeast. And last week, Los Angeles went up in flames and is still burning as this is written.

  These natural disasters are, obviously, a nightmare for the people directly impacted.

  But they might be part of something much bigger and far-reaching.

  Migration and Inflation

  Over the past half-century, tens of millions of Americans have poured into sunny states like Florida and California that are catastrophically unsuited for large populations. Specifically, the former is in hurricane alley and is guaranteed a direct hit from a Cat-5 one of these days, while the latter is a desert prone to droughts and raging wildfires (see today’s news).

  While this ill-fated mass migration was happening, the federal government was inflating away the dollar, causing the prices of financial assets like homes — especially in popular coastal cities — to soar to stratospheric highs.

  Miami, for instance:

  

  Deadly Combination

  Combine massive population increase with soaring home prices, then toss in recurring natural disasters, and the result is a doom loop for the insurance companies that have to replace those multi-million dollar houses.

  In response, insurers are either raising their rates beyond the means of many homeowners or exiting these markets altogether.

  Some background:

  California Fires Could Worsen State’s Insurance Crisis

  (Epoch Times) – Thousands of high-end homes burned in recent fires could lead to losses topping $150 billion, putting further pressure on California’s insurance market.

  As Californians already face significant challenges finding home insurance, the fires ravaging Los Angeles County could make it even more difficult and costly to insure properties in the future.

  Deadly fires erupted beginning Jan. 7, causing at least 11 deaths, leading to the ongoing ordered evacuation at one point of more than 180,000 individuals, with another 200,000 warned to get ready for possible evacuation.

  More than 10,000 buildings are damaged or destroyed across the county, according to the latest estimates, with the number expected to rise as fires are minimally contained, in what some are describing as one of the most costly natural disasters in American history. AccuWeather estimates economic losses from the fires to reach up to $150 billion.

  As of the latest tally on Jan. 9, the Pacific Palisades fire destroyed nearly 6,000 structures, including oceanfront mansions in neighborhoods north of Santa Monica, where homes sell for between $7 million and $20 million, with an average price of more than $3 million across the city.

  The affluent area is made up of primarily white-collar workers, according to Cal Fire demographics data, which shows slightly fewer than half of the structures affected by the Palisades Fire were built since 1970, and about 12,000 are older.

  Videos of the aftermath show businesses and homes leveled by fire, with the blocks of some neighborhoods completely demolished by the inferno.

  1 in 10 Homeowners in Los Angeles County Uninsured, May Lose Life’s Savings in Fires: Report

  (Epoch Times) – State Farm non-renewed approximately 1,600 policies in the region in 2024, of approximately 30,000 homeowners and 42,000 apartment policies it dropped statewide, citing rising costs and risks.

  “This decision was not made lightly and only after careful analysis of State Farm General’s financial health, which continues to be impacted by inflation, catastrophe exposure, reinsurance costs, and the limitations of working within decades-old insurance regulations,” the company said in a statement.

  “State Farm General takes seriously our responsibility to maintain adequate claims-paying capacity for our customers and to comply with applicable financial solvency laws. It is necessary to take these actions now.”

  Approximately 6,000 structures were lost in the Eaton Fire, as of the most recent count on Jan. 10. The East Altadena and Hasting Heights neighborhoods sustained significant damage.

  The average value of homes in the area is approximately $1.4 million, according to the online real estate listing firm Zillow.

  Insurance Market Stability in Question

  “At this point, it’s not an exaggeration to say the state’s facing an insurance crisis of both affordability and availability,” Ray Mueller, San Mateo County supervisor, said during a board meeting on Oct. 8.

  Seven of the 12 largest insurers, including State Farm which represents about 10 percent of the market share, according to Department of Insurance data, paused writing new policies since 2023.

  Is the World Becoming Uninsurable?

  (Charles Hugh Smith) – I ask the question, “is the world becoming uninsurable?” not as an expert on the insurance industry but as a homeowner who can no longer obtain hurricane insurance, and as an observer of long-term trends keenly interested in the way global risks pile up either unseen, denied or misinterpreted until it’s too late to mitigate them.

  The probability that we’re entering an era of globally higher risks is increasing, and this awareness is visible in headlines such as these:

  Home Losses From the LA Fires Hasten ‘An Uninsurable Future‘ (Time)

  ‘We’re in a New Era’: How Climate Change Is Supercharging Disasters (New York Times)

  LA fires could hit European insurance firms with billion-euro losses (CNBC)

  This is not an abstraction, though many are treating it as a policy debate. As noted previously here, the insurance industry is not a charity, and insurers bear the costs that are increasing regardless of opinions and policy proposals. Insurers operate in the real world, and their decisions to pull out of entire regions, reduce coverage and increase premiums are all responses to soaring losses, a reality reflected in these charts.

  

  Losses rise with inflation, of course, but the losses are rising far above background inflation.

  

  This raises a point few seem to ponder: the world isn’t simply a political structure, yet virtually all the proposed solutions to every problem are political or technological in nature: we can solve this or that politically, or with AI. That the private-sector can trigger crises that have no political or technological fix is on very few pundits’ radar.

  The problems being exposed do not lend themselves to tidy political / policy fixes that magically return the world to a past era of lower risks. Risks and losses cannot be extinguished, they can only be transferred to others. This is the intrinsic limit of political fixes: we take the risks and losses and transfer them to others lacking the political power to contest the transfer.

  Or we transfer the risks and losses to the entire system, increasing the potential for a systemic collapse.

  *  *  *

  Millions of Americans are thus left with much of their net worth tied up in houses that are prohibitively expensive to insure – if insurance is available at any price – and are therefore unsellable.

  The resulting “reverse wealth effect,” in which evaporating home equity causes people to reduce spending and/or sell other assets to fill the gap, could begin at the coasts and sweep through the rest of the country, catalyzing the next financial crisis.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 18:25

• Global Outlook: Cloudy With A Chance Of Disaster
  Global Outlook: Cloudy With A Chance Of Disaster

  The 20th edition of the World Economic Forum’s Global Risk Report paints a gloomy picture of the near-term future, as increasingly polarized societies face rising geopolitical tensions, mounting environmental challenges and technological advancements that have the potential to further sow division by spreading misinformation in every way, shape or form.

  As Statista’s Felix Richter shows in the chart below, just 11 percent of the 900 international experts surveyed for the report would describe their near-term outlook for the world as “stable”, meaning they see a low risk of global catastrophes in the next two years.

  

  You will find more infographics at Statista

  Looking at the 10-year horizon, that share falls further to 8 percent, while the share of respondents seeing very high or elevated risks for global catastrophes climbs from 5 and 31 percent, in the short term, to 17 and 45 percent in the long term.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 18:00

• Watch: SpaceX Catches Starship Booster With 'Chopsticks' For Second Time
  Watch: SpaceX Catches Starship Booster With ‘Chopsticks’ For Second Time

  Watch Live: Starship Flight 7 

   

  *   *   * 

  Update (1744ET): 

  SpaceX catches giant Starship booster with ‘Chopsticks’ on historic Flight 7.

  Mechazilla has caught the Super Heavy booster! pic.twitter.com/aq91TloYzY

  — SpaceX (@SpaceX) January 16, 2025

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Crypto-based Polymarket online betting marketplace: Will Chopsticks Catch Super Heavy?

  Boom! 

  

  This is the second catch in SpaceX’s history.

  *   *   * 

  SpaceX’s Starship-Super Heavy launch from Boca Chica, Texas, initially planned for Wednesday, has been rescheduled to Thursday evening. This will be the seventh full-stack flight of Starship, featuring a new version known as the Block 2 ship. 

  pic.twitter.com/wzNax8fGKW

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 16, 2025

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.jshttps://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  SpaceX shared new details about the next generation of Starship:

  A block of planned upgrades to the Starship upper stage will debut on this flight test, bringing major improvements to reliability and performance. The vehicle’s forward flaps have been reduced in size and shifted towards the vehicle tip and away from the heat shield, significantly reducing their exposure to reentry heating while simplifying the underlying mechanisms and protective tiling. Redesigns to the propulsion system, including a 25 percent increase in propellant volume, the vacuum jacketing of feedlines, a new fuel feedline system for the vehicle’s Raptor vacuum engines, and an improved propulsion avionics module controlling vehicle valves and reading sensors, all add additional vehicle performance and the ability to fly longer missions. The ship’s heat shield will also use the latest generation tiles and includes a backup layer to protect from missing or damaged tiles.

  The vehicle’s avionics underwent a complete redesign, adding additional capability and redundancy for increasingly complex missions like propellant transfer and ship return to launch site. Avionics upgrades include a more powerful flight computer, integrated antennas which combine Starlink, GNSS, and backup RF communication functions into each unit, redesigned inertial navigation and star tracking sensors, integrated smart batteries and power units that distribute data and 2.7MW of power across the ship to 24 high-voltage actuators, and an increase to more than 30 vehicle cameras giving engineers insight into hardware performance across the vehicle during flight. With Starlink, the vehicle is capable of streaming more than 120 Mbps of real-time high-definition video and telemetry in every phase of flight, providing invaluable engineering data to rapidly iterate across all systems.

  Once in orbit, Starship will deploy ten Starlink simulators to test the payload:

  While in space, Starship will deploy 10 Starlink simulators, similar in size and weight to next-generation Starlink satellites as the first exercise of a satellite deploy mission. The Starlink simulators will be on the same suborbital trajectory as Starship and are expected to demise upon entry. A relight of a single Raptor engine while in space is also planned.

  SpaceX is expected to attempt a second catch of the Super Heavy booster via the tower chopsticks. 

  Graphic via Tony Bela – InfographicTony on X… 

  

  Earlier….

  Jeff Bezos Finally Got His New Big Rocket Up, But Misses Booster Landing https://t.co/NpAyshVyhf

  — zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 16, 2025

  Crypto-based Polymarket online betting marketplace: Will Chopsticks Catch Super Heavy?

  

  . . . 

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 17:44

• President Trump, Please Don't Stop the Music
  President Trump, Please Don’t Stop the Music

  Authored by Jon Decker via RealClearMarkets,

  It’s easy to take for granted the convenience afforded to us now. During the recent snowstorm in Washington D.C., I recall wondering beforehand whether I should ‘stock up’ at a grocery store to ensure I had enough food, or purchase flashlights and batteries in the event of a power outage. All of this thinking would prove antiquated the very next day, when, despite ten inches of snow, nothing prevented me from ordering flashlights, batteries, or any cuisine imaginable delivered directly to me via Uber. While just decades ago, the only delivery options on a good day might have been pizza or Chinese food from two or three local establishments, in a 2025 snowstorm, I could order anything.

  

  What’s worth emphasizing is that such conveniences in our lives — whether they be smartphones, streaming platforms, GPS navigation, prime delivery, online banking, and free messaging services — are made available to us by “Big” businesses. These are the very businesses that politicians of both stripes now routinely attack. This brings us to another company whose life-enhancing services have been overlooked: Live Nation.

  The entertainment company Live Nation is now being sued by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), along with numerous state attorneys general, for allegedly being “too big” and having a monopoly on live music. These allegations stem from Live Nation’s acquisition of the ticket brokering service Ticketmaster in a merger approved by the Obama administration in 2010. However, the DOJ now claims that Live Nation has too much power in both setting the price of admission — which, contrary to popular belief, is predominantly dictated by the artists themselves, although still subject to market forces of supply and demand, just like any commodity — and having ownership or partnerships with venues where the artists they manage perform.

  What is so blindingly missed here by the DOJ is the streamlined effect this has on the concert-going experience for hundreds of millions of people each year. Like Walmart, one can think of Live Nation as a “one-stop shop” where immense convenience is afforded to us in having professional management of our “fan” experience from top to bottom. If there is any doubt that any of this is easy in terms of coordinating between artists, venues, and ticket sales, please revisit the “Fyre Festival” fiasco, where amateurs failed to deliver on all of those stages of production.

  From sound to stage to artists, Live Nation produces some of the best concerts on the planet. They can do so precisely because they are a “Big” business. As music fans, we benefit from Live Nation having managed all stages of a performance and feel assured when buying a Live Nation ticket that we are buying a quality product, unlike those purchased by Fyre Festival attendees. If there were any question that their shows were that good, we wouldn’t be buying these tickets in the first place.

  What’s even more troubling about the DOJ’s attack on the entertainment industry is how they went about it. Numerous leaks led up to the DOJ lawsuit, and additional questions have been raised about whether progressive outside groups (which had pushed for the breakup of Live Nation long before the Biden administration took action) had any influence. In any event, it appears the DOJ gave little consideration to any lesser, more targeted remedy before demanding the company’s outright breakup.

  With his business acumen, President Trump surely recognizes how large corporations provide numerous conveniences to the public. In the context of music, this could be applied to Live Nation, a company that has revolutionized the way we experience live events. For these reasons, Trump should do everything he can to ensure that music lovers continue to have access to their wide range of live events and concerts.

  For us fans, the show must go on.

  Jon Decker is a senior fellow at the Parkview Institute. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 17:40

• L.A. County Land-Grab Fears Ignite: "They're Going To Turn Altadena Into One Big Apartment Complex"
  L.A. County Land-Grab Fears Ignite: “They’re Going To Turn Altadena Into One Big Apartment Complex”

  Fears of a land grab have erupted across fire-ravaged areas of Los Angeles County, as local and state officials have already begun discussing plans for “LA 2.0.” One user on X commented, “Tell me this was a planned demolition without telling me this was a planned demolition.” 

  Governor Gavin Newsom announces a sweeping plan to rebuild Los Angeles, dubbing it “L.A. 2.0” under a Marshall Plan-inspired initiative that signals major changes for the city.

  Newsom reveals he’s already mobilizing city officials, civic influencers, powerful business moguls,… pic.twitter.com/cV8C5oR5Mb

  — Shadow of Ezra (@ShadowofEzra) January 12, 2025

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  “They are going to turn Altadena into one gigantic apartment complex,” X user Bay Area State OF Mind said, referring to local officials who want to change zoning in the Altadena area from single-family to multi-family. In other words, some officials want to usher in the construction of apartment buildings and so-called ‘smart cities.’

  They are going to turn Altadena into one gigantic apartment complex

  “As we start rebuilding, starting to relax some of the zoning laws, especially in a more working class neighborhood like Altadena. So that rather than putting up single-family residences, we could allow… pic.twitter.com/8GtLVzDLlH

  — BAY AREA STATE OF MIND (@YayAreaNews) January 15, 2025

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Altadena (and other areas in L.A. County) could serve as a proof-of-concept for how the Democratic Party transforms single-family neighborhoods into apartment buildings in a world where citizens own nothing and will be happy. 

  

  The cause of the fire remains undetermined at this point. However, the rapid spread was caused by high wind gusts, and “Incompetence in the limit is indistinguishable from sabotage,” Elon Musk wrote on X. 

  Incompetence in the limit is indistinguishable from sabotage

  — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 11, 2025

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  The question of sabotage is a key topic on X, mainly because the main reservoir in the Palisades, which would’ve likely suppressed the fire in the early days, was completely drained. 

  🚨 JUST IN: The Pacific Palisades reservoir was EMPTY AND OFFLINE when the firestorm exploded, per LA Times

  This is CRIMINAL.

  The reservoir holds 117 million gallons of water, and would’ve given firefighters ample pressure to effectively fight the blaze.

  Overpaid Dept. of… pic.twitter.com/afvRlbLJ73

  — Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) January 10, 2025

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  On Monday, Palisades homeowners sued the city of Los Angeles’ electric and water utility for not supplying enough water to firefighters. The plaintiffs claim that a reservoir in the area was drained, causing low pressure in fire hydrants.

  “This was supposed to be the water to put out the Palisades fire.”

  The FP’s Austyn Jeffs visits the Santa Ynez Reservoir that has reportedly been empty since February 2024. pic.twitter.com/DwO5OrYhWk

  — The Free Press (@TheFP) January 11, 2025

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  As of Thursday morning, the Palisades and Eaton Fires continue to rage, leaving dozens dead (and counting), ten-plus thousand structures destroyed, thousands of households displaced, and entire communities leveled. Meanwhile, Democrats are already pushing the conversation to rezone some areas to accommodate high-density, Communist-style apartment blocks. 

  As one X user noted, “Tell me this was a planned demolition without telling me this was a planned demolition.”

  

  All right before the L.A. 2028 Olympics… Makes you wonder. 

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 17:20

• The Burning State
  The Burning State

  Authored by Steve Gruber via American Greatness,

  The Golden State looks like a failed state, due to the failures of Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass. Because of these two, California is a mess and Los Angeles an inferno. Because of a blue wave of incompetence, the state is in the midst of one of the worst natural disasters in U.S. history. Because of decades of one-party rule under Democrats, our most populous state is in chaos, and our second-most populist city in flames. The fires continue to burn, with at least 16 dead and over 23,000 acres destroyed. The fires are evidence of gross negligence, mismanagement, and irresponsibility, in the face of a preventable tragedy. The fires are also evidence of absentee leadership—of zero leadership—in the face of mass suffering.

  

  The evidence is in the hills and streets of Pacific Palisades, where the fire still burns.

  The evidence is in Newsom’s response to the fires, a nonresponse of denial and deflection. The evidence is in Bass’s refusal to respond to questions about the fires. The evidence is visible and irrefutable, with lives lost and livelihoods decimated. And yet, despite everything, despite the downpour of ash and debris, despite the loss of more than 10,000 homes and other structures, Newsom continues to say nothing of substance and Bass continues to do nothing. The two continue to indict themselves, for they are unfit to serve and unable to govern. The good news is that we are four days from Inauguration Day, with President Trump back in the White House.

  Voters will note the contrast between President Trump and Newsom. The contrast is even greater with Bass, who makes Newsom look like a professional.

  Take, for example, this clip of Bass staring ahead and not responding to a reporter’s questions. Either Bass thinks she is a celebrity—that she is famous rather than infamous—and does not have to speak to the press, or she thinks the press should not speak to her. Does she think her job is ceremonial, that she owes the public nothing more than her presence? Does she think her job is to smile and wave and sign autographs? Is it too much to ask her to tell us what she plans to do—if she even has a plan—concerning the Palisades Fire? Does she think silence is sound, that she inspires confidence, or projects strength?

  When Bass does speak, the effect is anything but reassuring. She says the city has been through tragedies before, including “civil unrest” in 1992. Too bad the unrest was a riot, resulting in 63 deaths, 2,383 injuries, and 12,111 arrests. The riots also caused more than $1 billion in property damage, affecting 3,767 buildings, due to arson and looting. Bass ignores these facts, just as she ignores the fact that a riot is different from a natural disaster. The only thing that connects the two—the one thing both have in common—is that Democrats made them worse. Democrats were in charge then, and Democrats are in charge now. Los Angeles was a Democrat town then, and Los Angeles is a Democrat town now. But Los Angeles may not be as reliably blue much longer.

  The same is true for the governorship, where Gavin Newsom is out of touch and out of his league. Here he is complaining—about President Trump. Here he is attacking the “weaponized grievance” of President Trump. Here is Newsom, the governor of California, acting like a spectator, here he is talking like a bystander—an observer—instead of a leader. He says more about President Trump than he says about the fire. Newsom says nothing about efforts to contain the fire, or what he intends to do when the fire stops, because—surprise!—he has nothing to offer.

  Newsom would rather attack President Trump than provide a plan of attack. Here, again, Newsom would rather complain about President Trump than speak to voters’ complaints about his failures as governor. Newsom would rather say California’s reservoirs are full than take responsibility for failing to guarantee that the reservoir in the Palisades was full. Newsom would rather blame President Trump, who is not in office, than take the blame for his many and ongoing failures while in office in California.

  Here, in contrast, is President Trump saying the fire is a true tragedy. Here is President Trump saying more in two minutes than Newsom has said in over seven days. Here is President Trump saying we will rebuild, in spite of Newsom’s assertions to the contrary. Here is leadership—by President Trump—on behalf of residents of California. Here is plain speaking, by President Trump, in the spirit of Harry Truman and the style of Teddy Roosevelt. Here is a Republican who appeals to Democrats, telling an antidemocratic hack like Newsom to get out of the way.

  California may soon follow President Trump’s lead.

  The Golden State may soon reject Newsom and Bass.

  If the state is to be great again, if it is to rebuild and recover, Californians must reject Newsom and Bass.

  If California is to be the place where the future happens, if the state is to be healthy and strong, it has no choice but to reject Newsom and Bass.

  Let a real leader change things for the better.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 17:00

• What If Tech, The Market, & The State Are No Longer Solutions?
  What If Tech, The Market, & The State Are No Longer Solutions?

  Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

  If we study the problems outside the force-field of mythological beliefs, we find that there are no systemic solutions, there are only partial, local solutions.

  The status quo rests on a foundational belief that all problems, regardless of their nature, can be solved by technology, the market or the government (i.e. the state), or some combination of these three.

  Which one is the paramount solution depends on the specifics of the problem, of course, but what’s proposed as a solution also depends on which of the three has gained our primary loyalty: to true believers in technology, there’s always a tech fix. To true believers in the market, unleashing the market will fix any problem. To true believers in the power of the state, the Savior State is always the go-to solution.

  These solutions transform from practical toolboxes into mythologies when they become simplified belief structures, in effect articles of faith populated with heathens, heretics, true believers, taboos and excommunication. The limits of each toolbox are set aside in favor of a belief in the unlimited magical powers of the tools.

  We know we’ve entered the realm of mythologies when expressing doubts about the efficacy of tech, the market or the state unleashes an infuriated indignation that the gods of tech, the market and the state are being questioned, even as the proof of their powers are everywhere.

  The difference between a toolbox and a mythology is every tool has limits, where mythology has no limits. If we’re trying to drive nails with a handsaw, we’re not going to find much success. We’re forced to admit the tool isn’t going to solve the problem.

  But once we’re embedded in a mythological structure, then we see play-acting as a legitimate solution. So a diesel-fueled robot that roams the fields zapping weeds with lasers is the “solution” to food insecurity. See, there’s a tech solution to every problem. But the robot–AI!–can’t make it rain, or stop the windstorm that destroyed the harvest, or nurture the depleted soil. The robot is a phantom solution, a “solution” that meets the requirements of the mythology–there must be a tech solution–but doesn’t actually solve the problem of food insecurity, which is complex, structural and systemic.

  Here is a Venn diagram of the status quo understanding of problems and solutions all problems exist within the loving embrace of tech, the market and the state, and therefore all problems can be solved by applying various mixtures of these three elixirs.

  

  Here is the real-world situation, stripped of mythology and play-acting: the majority of the core problems are either made worse by tech, the market and the state–Anti-Progress writ large– or they’re beyond the reach of these conventional tools.

  

  This Venn diagram causes howls of protest and shrieks of agony: how dare you! Of course there are tech solutions, market solutions and government solutions to every problem under the sun. What else is there?

  What’s missing from this faith in mythologies is the recognition that the conventional solutions must comply with implicit rules that limit their efficacy. Any “solution” must not disrupt the status quo’s power structure, which has been over-optimized to the point of extreme fragility, a dynamic I discussed in Six Dynamics That Will Shape Our Future.

  In other words, any “solution” must leave existing profit streams untouched and the power pyramid as-is. Given this constraint, and the fragility created by over-optimization, the only “solutions” that are acceptable to those at the top of the pyramid are play-acting “solutions”, proposals presented as magical fixes that actually fix nothing, or create new problems–the definition of Anti-Progress.

  To state this out loud is deeply offensive, for we’ve been trained to worship at the altars of technology, the market and the state. It’s considered good sport to deride the limits of state solutions, but it’s anathema to question the limits of technology or the market.

  Markets only “solve problems” via infinite substitution of scarcities. OK, so we wiped out wild fisheries, the fix is fish farms. We bulldozed the native forests, the solution is tree farms. That each substitution isn’t actually a functional substitute, and is a much lower quality that the original, is taboo.

  That “the market solution” to declining profitability is monopoly (eliminating competition and transparency), addiction and reducing quality is also taboo.

  What “problem” did social media solve? Or is social media now another “problem” that has no solution? But now that social media has created trillion-dollar enterprises, it can’t be questioned as a “good thing.” There are tech solutions, market solutions, state regulations–of course we can “fix” social media’s Anti-Progress.

  As with all “solutions” satisfactory to the system, all these “solutions” are play-acting: they sound good, everyone can click “like” or “heart” the “solution,” but nothing actually changes.

  If we study the problems outside the force-field of mythological beliefs, we find that there are no systemic solutions, there are only partial, local solutions that we put in place ourselves. Rather then expect tech, the market and the state to “fix” healthcare, we’re better off accepting the system has no solutions because the profit streams and power structure are sacrosanct and cannot be touched, even though they’re the source of the problem.

  The only real, non-play-acting solution is to get healthy and reduce our dependence on “healthcare” to an absolute minimum. This approach applies to every problem in the red circle in the diagram above.

  * *  *

  Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

  Subscribe to my Substack for free

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 16:20

• Russia & Ukraine Holding 'Limited Talks' In Qatar
  Russia & Ukraine Holding ‘Limited Talks’ In Qatar

  Bloomberg has reported that Russia and Ukraine have been conducting “limited talks” in Qatar, citing unnamed Russian sources. The talks are said to focus on preventing threats to each country’s nuclear facilities as the war continues.

  The same report cited Ukrainian sources who say the contacts thus far have only focused on prisoner exchanges, which has resulted in several major swaps throughout the conflict. The latest exchange was Wednesday, involving 25 POWs returned on each side.

  But it’s clear that any direct negotiations under the incoming Trump administration is likely to grow out of these existing ‘limited’ contacts and exchanges. The Kremlin on Thursday offered ‘no comment’ when asked about Bloomberg’s reporting.

  

  Despite the Trump campaign rhetoric of a speedy negotiation track which will reach a permanent truce soon after he enters office, Trump’s team has since acknowledge that talks are likely to take much longer.

  A Wednesday Reuters report said, “Advisers to President-elect Donald Trump now concede that the Ukraine war will take months or even longer to resolve, a sharp reality check on his biggest foreign policy promise – to strike a peace deal on his first day in the White House.”

  “Two Trump associates, who have discussed the war in Ukraine with the president-elect, told Reuters they were looking at a timeline of months to resolve the conflict, describing the Day One promises as a combination of campaign bluster and a lack of appreciation of the intractability of the conflict and the time it takes to staff up a new administration,” the report continued.

  Keith Kellog, Trump’s incoming envoy for the Russia-Ukraine crisis, has expressed hope that a deal can be secured within the first 100 days of the Trump administration, which has a far longer timeline that what’s been previously given.

  Trump’s incoming national security advisor, Rep. Mike Waltz, has said it will be a priority of the new Trump administration to get Ukraine to lower its conscription age from 25 to 18 in order to “stabilize” the battlefield. This is all a tacit admission that Russia is in the driver’s seat and that Ukraine currently has little real leverage.

  As for one area Moscow is expected to remain resolute on, Bloomberg details:

  Russia will demand Ukraine drastically cut back military ties with the NATO alliance and become a neutral state with a limited army in any talks with incoming US President Donald Trump, according to people familiar with the matter.

  Increasingly confident he has the advantage on the battlefield in Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin is determined to achieve his goal that Kyiv never join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and that limits are placed on its military capacity, said the people with knowledge of Kremlin thinking who asked not to be identified discussing sensitive information.

  Additionally, Russian media has quoted top national security official Dmitry Medvedev to say that Ukraine won’t ever get a ‘Germany-style reunification’ deal:

  Suggestions that Ukraine could get a security deal similar to West Germany after World War II are betting on the dissolution of Russia, former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev has claimed.

  West Germany joined NATO in 1955, while East Germany remained part of the Soviet bloc until reunification in 1990. Moscow did not oppose the move, as the US and its allies had assured the USSR’s leaders that Western troops would not go beyond Germany’s eastern border. NATO’s breach of that promise is the primary cause of the current animosity between Russia and the West, according to Russian officials.

  “Who would honestly consider a scenario, in which a nuclear power relinquishes something to the ugly dwarf named Ukraine?” Medvedev wrote on Telegram. “It means they can only count on Russia’s dissolution.”

  Sen. Marco Rubio calls for concessions in resolving the Ukraine-Russia war, adding “there is no way Russia takes all of Ukraine,” while it is also “unrealistic” that Ukraine will push Russia back to where it began at the start of the conflict. https://t.co/wwrk9C1Q2F pic.twitter.com/zXm91SW303

  — ABC News (@ABC) January 15, 2025

  https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

  Top Russian leaders, including President Putin himself, have consistently spoken with the assumption that the four annexed territories of Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia will remain Russia’s forever.

  Tyler Durden
  Thu, 01/16/2025 – 15:45

Digest powered by RSS Digest