Aggregator

At his best, Grigor Dimitrov is a five-tool player.

Independence Day didn’t invent or perfect the summer movie, but it arguably understood it better than anything since.

“It happened so quick. A fun day of friends turns into a nightmare,” the girl's grieving mother said.

They will have to play their next match without standout striker Folarin Balogun.

A baby found dead at a Michigan music festival was born alive inside the porta-potty where it was found alongside the placenta and umbilical cord, according to reports.  Fluid found inside the baby’s lungs and stomach showed it was breathing at birth Sunday inside the grim toilet at the Electric Forest four-day festival in Rothbury,...

If you’re searching for a stay in the heart of America the Beautiful, look no further than a truly old-school inn.

The Grammy-winning pop star and her fiancé were photographed dining at the hotspot during a Big Apple date night back in May.

The Grammy-winning pop star and her fiancé were photographed dining at the hotspot during a Big Apple date night back in May.

Sam Altman's OpenAI Discusses Handing Trump Admin A 5% Stake

The U.S. government's equity portfolio could be expanding again, this time with a potential 5% stake in Sam Altman's OpenAI at an $852 billion valuation, according to a new report. The proposed stake would mark another step toward taking direct financial positions in tech giants. For OpenAI, buy-in from the Trump administration could ease mounting political pressure ahead of an IPO.

The Financial Times reports that Altman has floated giving the U.S. government a 5% stake in OpenAI, modeled after the Alaska Permanent Fund, a state-owned sovereign wealth fund created to invest a portion of Alaska's oil revenue for the long-term benefit of Alaskans.

The FT noted that the proposal would spur other tech giants, including Anthropic, Google, and Meta, to follow suit by handing over stakes to the federal government.

The discussions remain early and "conceptual," and any arrangement could require congressional approval, the report said, adding that the idea stems from mounting pressure in the Trump administration over AI's impact on jobs and the localized blowback against data center buildouts nationwide.

Earlier this week, Elon Musk's xAI Memphis rolled out a 'data center dividend' for the surrounding community, offering free Starlink kits and half-price service to quell any dissent against AI. This move suggests that data center operators nationwide may offer other forms of dividends in the future to appease surrounding communities.

Back to the FT report, Altman has reportedly discussed public ownership with Trump, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Sanders, a crazed socialist, has argued for the public stake in AI companies to exceed 50%. The socialist and far-left lawmakers who make up the Democratic Socialists of America have even signaled a questionable data center moratorium - a move that would only cede compute power to China.

In recent months, Altman's chatbot company proposed a "public wealth fund" that "provides every citizen — including those not invested in financial markets — with a stake in AI-driven economic growth."

"The goal is not only to support people through economic change after decisions have already been made, but to give them a stake and a voice in shaping how that change unfolds," OpenAI said in a blog post.

The talks come after the Trump administration took a 10% stake in Intel, 15% in MP Materials, and ...

For OpenAI, a government stake could ease tensions with the Trump administration ahead of an IPO (delayed until 2027), while offering a political answer to concerns that AI is financially wrecking low-income folks.

Meanwhile, The Information's earlier report that Nvidia has been renting back its own compute capacity from neocloud providers raises one obvious question...

Yeah I’m sorry the only reason that NVIDIA is renting back its own capacity from neoclouds is that the demand doesn’t exist to sell it https://t.co/QXS0wVbkB1 pic.twitter.com/LXvgZCRhFX

— Ed Zitron (@edzitron) July 2, 2026

... is there really enough end-user compute demand to absorb the AI buildout? 

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/02/2026 - 07:30

An 11-year-old boy crashed a pickup truck into a group of monks on a pilgrimage walk in northeastern Thailand on Thursday, killing eight, officials said.

Japan Takes Next Step In $2.3 Trillion Plan With Domestic AI Model And 10M Robots

The Japanese government has unveiled plans to create a domestically developed artificial intelligence model and put roughly 10 million AI-equipped robots into operation across 18 sectors by 2040 - building on a 14-year growth strategy announced last month, which targets ¥370 trillion ($2.3 trillion) in combined public and private investment across 17 priority areas, including physical AI, semiconductors, quantum technology, and nuclear fusion.

Kawasaki Kaleido

The initiative will receive up to 1 trillion yen (approximately $6.1 billion) in government funding over the next five years. Crucially, the funding is tied to annual milestone reviews - making the trillion-yen figure a ceiling rather than a guarantee, with Tokyo retaining the ability to pull back if early targets are missed.

The AI model will be developed by Noetra, a consortium formally commissioned by Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) and its innovation agency NEDO. Noetra is majority-owned by SoftBank, NEC, Sony Group, and Honda, with Fujitsu and Rakuten reportedly weighing whether to join. The consortium is also working alongside AIST, Japan's national research laboratory. Noetra's investor base is expected to grow to 44 participating companies spanning automotive, electronics, manufacturing, finance, and logistics. The technical goal is a multimodal foundation model capable of processing language, images, video, and sensor data simultaneously - giving robots the ability to interpret a physical environment and act within it, rather than simply executing pre-programmed instructions.

The effort reflects a broader global push by countries to build "sovereign AI" capabilities and reduce reliance on dominant U.S. and Chinese technologies.

A key focus of the strategy is physical AI - the application of artificial intelligence in real-world environments rather than just on screens. This includes self-driving vehicles, factory automation, and humanoid robots designed for practical tasks.

On Tuesday, the government released an updated national AI robotics strategy. Industry Minister Ryosei Akazawa said the plan aims to "vigorously promote social implementation across a total of 18 fields," including newly added sectors such as restaurants, food manufacturing, and medicine.

"We will build and grow data infrastructure for physical AI and robots that capitalize on Japan's strengths," Akazawa told reporters.

Those strengths are considerable. Japan is home to some of the world's leading industrial robotics manufacturers - including FANUC, Yaskawa Electric, and Kawasaki Heavy Industries - and produces roughly half of all industrial robots globally by volume, according to the International Federation of Robotics. The country already deploys more robots per manufacturing worker than any other nation, making it the natural proving ground for physical AI at industrial scale.

The push comes as Japan grapples with a rapidly aging and shrinking population. More than 29% of the Japanese population is now aged 65 or older - the highest proportion of any country in the world - and the working-age population has been in decline since 1995. Policymakers see advanced robotics as a critical tool to fill widening labor gaps across industries rather than a supplement to an adequate workforce.

Can they make it happen?

Japan has announced a $2.3 trillion startup tech strategy just after South Korea’s $1.3 trillion pledge

The numbers are just as ridiculous as what they promised Trump for US investment in 2025

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) July 1, 2026 FANUC factory floor Tyler Durden Thu, 07/02/2026 - 07:00

"That a 14-year-old immigrant child who couldn't even speak English when she arrived [to America], can become the 41st treasure of the United States — that is the American dream," said Rosario Marin.

Sports in America has forever been the forum in which higher goals are met and broader accomplishments are pursued.

Some products solve problems, others change culture. From McDonalds to Coca-Cola, Apple to Levi's these brands transformed everyday products into our nation's most influential exports.

From the day the Soviets put an astronaut into space in April 1961, the race was on with America to get a man on the moon.

A mock firing squad stormed into a Kentucky baptist church's vacation bible school -- and executed the devil as part of a bewildering skit in front of young children.

Why Bernie Sanders' AI Bill Is Fascistic And Dangerous

Authored by Amirhossein Eshtiaghi via The Mises Institute,

Bernie Sanders is a socialist populist. His unfamiliarity with the fundamentals of economics explains why he considers Denmark to be socialist. A former Danish Prime Minister once implicitly addressed such claims, noting that Denmark’s economy is not socialist, but rather a market economy. But the truth does not matter to American leftists.

He has now made headlines again with a bill that would expand state participation in the AI sector—a plan that, contrary to the claims of his supporters, could have disastrous consequences. In the following, these consequences are briefly examined.

This Is a Fascist Policy

Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany, after the Soviet Union, were among the countries with the highest levels of state ownership and state control over the economy. In both Germany and Italy, the state controlled many companies, while private firms operated under strict state supervision and intervention. The Nazis nationalized nearly half of the economy and then used extensive regulations to bring the private sector under state control. Mussolini followed a similar approach. The state determined what goods would be produced, how they would be produced, and in what form they would be supplied.

Sanders says that artificial intelligence does not belong to billionaires but to the people. Fascists and Nazis used the same argument—that the private sector should be organized in line with the public interest—to justify extensive intervention in the market. In fact, Hitler and Mussolini were able to control the means of production in much the same way without removing corporate managers.

Comparing Sanders to fascism may seem unusual, but it should not be forgotten that the main leaders of Italian fascism, including Mussolini, were initially socialists before they became fascists. In fact, as Thomas DiLorenzo argues in his book The Problem with Socialism, fascism had socialist origins.

Regarding state ownership and state influence over AI, Sanders and Trump take similar approaches. Trump himself has admitted that the economic views of his voters and Sanders’s voters “aren’t that far apart”—and that may be one of the few honest statements Trump has made in his life. In fact, both are populists and seek to expand state power and weaken the free market economy.

Therefore, Sanders’s proposal, or similar proposals, could allow the state to gain control over the AI industry while preserving the appearance of private ownership. In that sense, such proposals can reasonably be described as fascistic, since they enable state control over production without formally abolishing the private sector.

A Threat to Civil Liberties

States have always used intelligence agencies and affiliated institutions to restrict social freedoms, silence opponents, and monitor users online. They also pressure various platforms to hand over user data so it can be used to suppress dissent. If the state becomes the owner of artificial intelligence companies, it will be able to collect users’ information freely and without any obstacles.

Sanders’s supporters might privately believe that this would be a useful tool for monitoring opponents, allowing the state to identify and silence those who oppose their leftist ideology. However, it must be remembered that this power is being granted to the state, not to a specific political party. If figures like Trump—or any other authoritarian personality—come to power, this authority will fall into their hands, allowing them to suppress those very same leftists. It empowers states to monitor anyone they deem an “undesirable element.” Ultimately, this could pose a serious threat to liberty.

Politicians already possess considerable power; control over artificial intelligence would multiply that power many times over—and more power brings more corruption.

Weakening Innovation

This policy threatens innovation. State favoritism can make it difficult for new and creative players to enter the market and can slow the process of “creative destruction.” It should also be noted that the managers of AI companies might even welcome such a situation, since it could allow them to eliminate new competitors in the industry and reach a monopolistic position.

After all, once the state enters the field, companies could rely on the support of politicians so they no longer have to compete with non-American companies. They might even use the argument that the state is a shareholder in AI companies to justify banning the use of AI systems from other countries in the United States.

The support of some AI companies’ executives for proposals that would lead to state involvement in this industry is highly suspicious. We will have to wait and see what happens, but it is possible that Sanders’s bill could actually help those same billionaires eliminate their competitors.

Technology Should Not Be Held Back

Obstructing technological growth is both foolish and harmful. The claim that artificial intelligence destroys jobs is a deceptive and misleading argument. Opposing AI in order to preserve certain jobs is just as irrational as trying to stop the spread of the internet because the use of email caused some postal workers to lose their jobs.

By the same logic, we should have banned the light bulb because it led to job losses in the candle-making industry. Likewise, we should have abandoned modern textile machinery because it allowed the same amount of clothing to be produced with fewer workers.

If we follow this line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, we would have to return to the Stone Age. Innovation should not be stopped. Technological advancement and innovation are the primary engines of productivity growth and rising living standards. Just as old jobs disappear, new employment opportunities emerge. For example, many workers from traditional industries can find work in newer and more productive sectors of the economy. We should not hinder the growth of industries that can improve the lives of billions of people merely to preserve the jobs of a limited number of individuals.

A Populist Claim

Artificial intelligence, like any other industry, is built by entrepreneurs and producers, and its products are exchanged in the marketplace. The assertion that, “AI does not belong to billionaires; it belongs to the people” is akin to claiming that potatoes do not belong to their farmers but to “the people,” and that therefore, 50 percent of all farmland must be seized by the state.

Sanders is a master of slogans like “Billionaires shouldn’t exist,” and he is strategic in this choice. Were he to replace “billionaires” with “millionaires,” the slogan would inevitably implicate him and leftist celebrities. It benefits him to funnel jealousy toward billionaires, thereby shielding himself from public outrage.

If wealth is inherently evil, then being a millionaire is equally so. In that case, the left would be forced to chant slogans such as “Millionaires should not exist”—or perhaps even say, “Damn Sean Penn, Oprah, and Sanders.” After all, they are all millionaires.

The benefits of AI do not accrue solely to billionaires; billions of people worldwide utilize these tools—in medicine, education, and thousands of other fields. If private companies, absent rent-seeking or government handouts, earn profits through innovation and creativity, there is nothing inherently wrong with that. No one is forced to use AI; those who choose to do so effectively vote with their dollars to reward the companies that provide these services. One can only hope that Sanders has not used these tools or maintained an AI account himself—because if he has, he has been lining the pockets of the very capitalists he claims to despise.

The Abuse of a Public Wealth Fund

Politicians can abuse national wealth funds. In Russia, Vladimir Putin has leveraged the National Wealth Fund to bankroll the war in Ukraine. The US state could just as easily exploit such a fund to finance war or violate human rights. In this scenario, revenues generated from AI would be diverted away from vital investments in innovation and instead channeled into the production of bombs to be dropped on innocent people.

Conclusion

Regrettably, politicians from both major American parties seem determined to undermine the free market and the values of classical liberalism. From Trump’s foolish tariffs to Sanders’s socialist and demagogic policies, both are actively eroding the foundations of economic freedom.

Americans should not feel compelled to choose between economic nationalism and socialism, just as they were never truly forced to choose between fascism and socialism in the twentieth century. There is only one path worth pursuing: the defense of libertarian values.

The real solution to improving living standards lies in the state’s complete withdrawal from all economic and social spheres. Unless the American public shifts its focus toward the ideals of classical liberalism or libertarianism, we will continue to witness a cycle of populism from both parties, as well as state obstruction of growth and innovation.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/02/2026 - 06:30

Research found that a group of older adults may maintain stronger cognitive despite signs of brain aging. The findings highlight the link between mobility, lifestyle and cognitive resilience.

Lady Liberty never looked so good.

Vance Warns 'US Has Options' As Iran Rejects Direct Doha Talks - Trump Insists Diplomacy Is 'Very Good'

Update(1315): The American side is keeping up the illusion of progress on Iran talks, even as Tehran has once again on Wednesday confirmed no direct meeting has taken in place in Doha - nor are there plans for direct dialogue, its deputy FM has said. President Trump has simultaneously hailed "very good" talks on Iran in Doha - apparently just referencing envoys Witkoff and Kushner merely dialoguing with third country intermediaries. 

On the same day, Vice President JD Vance played a little 'bad cop' - warning that if Iran fails to acquiesce and destabilizes the region that the US could respond, escalating in several ways. "If Iran attempts to rebuild its nuclear program, threaten its neighbors and support terrorism, President Trump has options to deal with it," Vance said, without specifying further. Earlier the WSJ stated that Trump had been briefed on several military options - including 'all-out war'; however, the US president is said to want to give diplomacy more time.

Vance additionally stated that the US "dropped bombs on Iran because it fired on ships, and we used leverage to ensure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz" - and suggested this could be done again. He also mentioned that current indirect Doha talks are "to discuss the details and flow of maritime traffic." According to more:

Addressing troops at a naval air base in Virginia, US Vice President JD Vance says Iran’s nuclear program has been set back decades thanks to American military strikes against it.

“If you look at what our own intelligence says about their nuclear program, they are further away from developing a nuclear bomb than they have ever been since basically the last 20 or 30 years,” Vance says, stopping short of US President Donald Trump’s claim that Iran’s nuclear program has been “totally obliterated.”

“What the president asks you to accomplish is to destroy the defense industrial base of that country, so that if they ever decided to rebuild their military, or if they ever decided to rebuild that nuclear program, they would be harmless to do it. You did that exactly as well,” Vance tells the US troops.

Iran has meanwhile consistently denied that it is pursuing nuclear weapons, but very likely many IRGC hardliners are calling for just that.

On the Hormuz front, the US believes it is regaining leverage:

• US SEES 10 MILLION BARRELS VIA HORMUZ SAPPING IRAN OIL LEVERAGE
• VANCE: WE'VE HAD FREE COMMERCIAL TRANSIT FOR LAST THREE DAYS
• VANCE: WE CAN'T DROP BOMBS  FOR SAKE OF DROPPING BOMBS
• VANCE: IF IRAN TRIES TO REBUILD NUCLEAR PROGRAM, US HAS OPTIONS

*  *  *

President Trump started this week by claiming that Iran had "requested" direct talks in Qatar, but as of yet the ground reality in Doha is that Iranian officials have refused, leaving US representatives Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to just bide their time and deal with Qatari and Pakistani intermediaries.

In this context of Tehran putting direct contacts on hold, Trump has reportedly been briefed on options for a possible return to broader war with Iran, but has for now opted to continue diplomatic negotiations, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal citing admin officials.

Source: White House/Getty Images

The late Monday report described that discussions on "all-out war" planning involved War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, with the focus of the briefing described as assessing whether the United States should abandon talks with Tehran and resume full-scale military strikes. The Journal characterized, citing the officials, the latter option as—

...a move some of them describe as "finishing the job." While not making a final decision, Trump has told aides he believes another round of full-scale attacks could derail diplomacy and hurt Washington’s chances of ultimately dismantling Iran’s nuclear program.

While Trump is said to be leaning toward diplomacy, the report suggests he had not made a final decision yet, as new large-scale strikes would certainly destroy already fragile negotiations.

The WSJ further specified the president has told advisers he is ready to allow nuclear negotiations with Tehran to extend beyond an August 18 deadline, giving breathing room and flexibility for talks to produce real results.

It should be noted that the Pentagon and US intelligence community routinely present 'options' for the Commander-in-Chief:

Pentagon briefings on a president’s military options in a conflict aren’t unusual, with Trump routinely holding formal and impromptu meetings on Iran. But the latest discussions suggest he is looking for ways to break the deadlock with Tehran and hasn’t yet ruled out a return to fighting. Resuming the conflict, some officials acknowledge, would be a tacit admission that the much-touted Iran deal failed.

Central sticking points remain the initial release of $6 billion in Iranian frozen assets, and the question of tolls or fees for Hormuz Strait passage. The US side has yet to see enough good behavior from Iran to release the funds - but perhaps the administration is more worried about domestic criticism from the hawks. Neither side has found agreement for moving forward.

In the meantime so-called hardliners within Iran are putting pressure on their negotiators to make Washington 'pay' if it won't honor its agreements outlined in the MoU. As geopolitical blog Moon of Alabama has laid out:

The U.S. is obviously not willing to fulfill the conditions set out in its Memorandum of Understanding with Iran. It will need more pressure from Iran to make the U.S. agree to its demands.

The current team of Iranian leaders who had negotiated and signed the MoU are President Masoud Pezeshkian -a good heart surgeon but unexperienced politician-, Speaker of the Parliament Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf -a former IRGC leader and professional politician-, and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi -a longtime professional diplomat.

All three are now under critique for multiple breaches of the MoU by the U.S. and the perceived lack of Iranian responses to those.

Some 68 members of 88 men strong Assembly of Experts have published (in Farsi, in in English) a strong admonishing advice to the negotiators to stick to the ten points the Supreme Leader of Iran had defined.

The Assembly of Experts is the elected board of senior Islamic jurists which can elect and disposes of the Supreme Leader. It is residing in Qom. Its assembly building had been destroyed in one of the U.S. attacks on Iran.

The Assembly's statement from just days stated in part, "In accordance with the commitment of the respected officials to the leadership and the people, it is expected that any breach of the agreement and violation of the clauses of the memorandum of understanding will be responded to immediately."

The Iranian Foreign Minister's own rhetoric has grown more pointed and heated at this point:

The terms of the Islamabad MoU are crystal clear and public for all to see.

POTUS has committed the U.S. to muzzling its pets in Tel Aviv. If they ignore their master, Iran will school them.

Any threat against our People and Leadership will receive Immediate Powerful Response. pic.twitter.com/VrKa259gYd

— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) July 1, 2026

So far, the White House has tended to ignore such strong rhetoric coming from Araghchi - again, likely not willing to damage negotiations all based on some social media tit-for-tat exchanges.

But all of this without doubt demonstrates that Tehran won't so easily bend, and the two sides could be headed toward more direct clashes as absolutist demands and interpretations keep being presented.

Tyler Durden Thu, 07/02/2026 - 06:14