SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The feds are raising the alarm about a new category of threat:
In the wake of attacks on CEOs, a nationwide protest movement targeting data centers, and increasing concerns about AI job replacement, federal intelligence agencies and domestic law enforcement are circulating reports with a new domestic target in mind: anti-technology extremists.
More than 1,000 pages of unpublished reports from the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and fusion centers obtained by WIRED show a national shift taking place to surveil this new and worryingly broad category of people and activities deemed an emerging threat.
This new effort follows President Donald Trump's National Security Presidential Memo 7, which instructs the Department of Justice to target anyone holding "anti-American," "anti-Christian," and "anti-capitalism" beliefs. Earlier this month, Trump's counterterrorism czar, Sebastian Gorka, released a public counterterrorism strategy claiming that left-wing extremists are one of the three top counterterrorism priorities facing the United States.
Taken together, these Trump administration directives have commandeered the domestic surveillance apparatus to surveil and criminalize speech and assembly that challenges the ideology of the White House. A new focus on anti-technology extremism adds an unreported category to already public designations under a presidency that has heavily invested political and material capital in AI and data center proliferation.
Among the documents in the tranche obtained by WIRED is a New York Intelligence and Counterterrorism Bureau report that warns of widespread upheaval in response to AI adoption. Of particular note is a novel term for what the bureau purports to be an emerging extremism threat.
"The chaotic atmosphere that may result from emergent AI technology in the next five years may fuel large-scale protests that devolve into civil unrest and anti-tech violent extremist activity, especially in large urban areas such as New York City," the report reads. The term "anti-tech violent extremism" does not appear in any publicly available DHS or FBI domestic extremism reports or guides and represents a novel grouping of a wide range of ideologies under a single extremist category.
[...] Created in the wake of 9/11, 80 fusion centers now pockmark the country and serve as go-betweens for federal intelligence agencies and state and local law enforcement. In addition to concerns about portions of the American populace disturbed by the rapid proliferation of AI, these centers are also gathering and circulating "intelligence" about alleged threats to data centers.
A Western Pennsylvania fusion center, for example, claimed that "adversarial actors, including state-sponsored entities, criminal groups, and extremists, such as homegrown violent extremists or environmental extremists, may target US data centers" and that "these actors could also exploit the strategic importance of data centers to the US economy, using them for activities like cryptocurrency mining or leveraging third-party entities, such as front companies, to gain access to US data and infrastructure."
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday June 07, @04:35PM (4 children)
So enshitification has indeed occurred. So why are we to expect that such adulteration of the McDonalds burger happened only in ingredients not in price? That continues to be why I think your measure of inflation is nonsense.
Quite a bunch. The country as a whole is much poorer than the US, right?
Were those "great depressions" followed by vast wealth inequality? Nope. The recessions in question corrected for the wealth inequality all by themselves. In fact, that would be the driver for the recessions be it the actual Great Depression, the modern real estate crisis - the "Great Recession", or the panics [wikipedia.org] of 1893 and 1896. Each was preceded by massive overvaluation of stocks, bonds, and other assets. And are you counting poor people wealth - future total compensation? No, of course not.
I recognize the utter bankruptcy of wealth inequality as a measure of societal fitness. It's bullshit. Nobody ever measures wealth inequality after the asset bubble bursts or include future income, but that's where you'll get the more accurate reading, such as it is. But of course, if you did that, you wouldn't have an eternal grievance.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday June 15, @07:04PM (3 children)
So why are we to expect that such adulteration of the McDonalds burger happened only in ingredients not in price?
Because I was comparing the 1969 15¢ burger with the 2026 $2.49 burger saying that the minimum should be $24.90. So you think $24.90 is too low? I agree.
The recessions in question corrected for the wealth inequality all by themselves.
Incorrect. The depressions, NOT "recessions" in question were corrected for the wealth inequality all by sane government programs like the WPA, minimum wage, and banking regulations.
And are you counting poor people wealth
The poor have no wealth! I'm no longer poor, but my wealth is the value of my house minus my debts, maybe $40k which is taxed as property yearly as all of Elon's properties should be; stocks, bonds, metals, NOT just real estate. And "future wealth" is a lie used by fraudsters. "Future wealth" only exists for those with magic crystal balls, which do not exist. The only "future wealth" that isn't a lie, but a hope, is future interest on current savings. The poor CANNOT save; they're POOR. Rich fools can't seem to understand that.
Nobody ever measures wealth inequality after the asset bubble bursts or include future income
Wrong again, they actually do. After the 1928 market crash, wealth inequality became worse, according to Google's AI. The government under FDR after Hoover (who refused to do anything, saying, like you, that it would correct itself) lost by a historic landslide instituted a minimum wage (a livable minimum until the 1980s) that ended the working poor (They're back! Happy?), the WPA because industry under the honest (compared to Trump) Harding, the cool Coolidge, and the Hoover vacuum had self-destructed, and banking regulations so when middle class people put their money in the bank, the bankers couldn't steal it legally.
Where did you learn history, Trump University?
The Epstein Memorial Golden Presidential Ballroom: Let them eat cake.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday June 16, @11:47AM (2 children)
I think it's way too high. Just make minimum wage $0.00 per hour and then nobody has to waste resources on bureaucracy that doesn't need to be done. Market action already provides a natural, high minimum wage. As to the burger, I think this shows substantial inflation over the decades from McDonalds hamburgers rather than a burning need to create widespread unemployment by generating a very high minimum wage. That burger is a crappy, overpriced product.
"Worse than we thought". That's the excuse around 2010 that was trotted out when the Obama's administration's heavy lifting [google.com] ended up worse than the projection [nytimes.com] from doing nothing at all (one of the justifications for the heavy economic stimulus was to lower unemployment - it had the opposite effect). And FDR's administration had that double dip - a second recession in 1937-1938. Yet another couple of situations where doing something was worse than doing nothing.
The obvious rebuttal: future income (not "future wealth" though it is in part that). The ongoing refusal to account for future income is why measures of wealth inequality remain an utter waste of time.
The market crash happened in 1929 and my AI says wealth inequality peaked then as well.
In other words, destruction of wealth during the Hoover and FDR regimes followed by high demand for labor in the post-war period. It's worth noting that while the US has struggled a bit following labor competition with the rest of the world (starting in the 1960s and on), we've since seen a massive global drop in wealth inequality (once you including future income as wealth). There's a profound improvement in the human condition easy to see once you stop looking for the burgers of the world.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Friday June 26, @05:51PM (1 child)
I think it's way too high. Just make minimum wage $0.00 per hour and then nobody has to waste resources on bureaucracy that doesn't need to be done.
We tried that for thousands of years and it didn't work. Then we instituted the minimum wage as a living wage and nobody who worked full time was poor.
Then Fascists took over America and we have the lowest federal minimum in North America and lower than Europe. It's so low that those having their labor legally stolen are eligible for all of the poverty giveaways you had to previously be unemployed to receive.
You, sir, either have never had to work for a living or are an absolutely brainless moron (or troll, same thing). I need not read farther. Please go away.
The Epstein Memorial Golden Presidential Ballroom: Let them eat cake.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday June 27, @02:35AM
You are conflating slavery with voluntary labor. It did indeed work for thousands of years.
Plenty of people whose labor wasn't worth minimum wage were poor.
Show that lower minimum wage has been even a slight problem then or now.
I've worked at minimum wage before. We've played this game [soylentnews.org] before. Your ideological blindness is not my lack of life experience.