Connect with us

Tech

The Instant Smear Campaign Against Border Patrol Shooting Victim Alex Pretti

Published

on

The Instant Smear Campaign Against Border Patrol Shooting Victim Alex Pretti


Within minutes of Alex Pretti being shot and killed by a federal immigration officer in Minneapolis on Saturday, the Trump administration, backed by right-wing influencers, launched a smear campaign against the victim, labeling him a “terrorist” and a “lunatic.”

Pretti, 37, was killed during a confrontation with multiple federal immigration agents. Pretti was an American citizen and a registered nurse who worked in the Department of Veterans Affairs, according to a colleague who spoke to the Guardian. Video from a bystander shows Pretti was attempting to help a woman who had been pepper sprayed by an immigration agent when officers tackled him.

Pretti’s killing comes 17 days after Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jonathan Ross shot Renee Nicole Good, a mother of three. Good was also 37 at the time of her death.

Minneapolis police chief Brian O’Hara said during a press conference on Saturday that information about what had led up to Pretti’s fatal confrontation was limited, but at a separate press conference, Greg Bovino, the Border Patrol commander overseeing federal operations in Minneapolis, claimed to have a full assessment of what had taken place.

Bovino claimed Pretti had approached officers with a 9mm handgun, resisted disarmament, and was shot in what he described as a clear act of self-defense. He claimed the man had two loaded magazines and lacked identification, and alleged that Pretti intended to “massacre law enforcement,” while the Border Patrol agent who killed Pretti, he said, had extensive training.

The Department of Homeland Security reiterated Bovino’s claims in a post on X that has been viewed over 17 million times at the time of publication, and the narrative was carried unquestioningly by right-wing outlets, like the Post Millenial, which published a story headlined: “Armed agitator Alex Pretti appeared to want ‘maximum damage’ and to ‘massacre’ law enforcement when shot by BP in Minnesota.”

Key portions of these claims are contradicted by publicly available evidence.

Multiple videos shared on social media in the moments after the shooting show no indication that Pretti’s gun was visible when he was approached by the officers. Analyses by The New York Times and Bellingcat found that Pretti was clearly holding a phone, not a gun, when the federal officers approached him and forced him to the ground.

On Truth Social, President Donald Trump weighed in to blame Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. “The Mayor and the Governor are inciting Insurrection, with their pompous, dangerous, and arrogant rhetoric,” Trump wrote in a post that included an image of a gun DHS claimed Pretti was carrying at the time he was killed.

Vice President JD Vance backed up Trump’s criticism of local leadership, sharing a screenshot of the president’s Truth Social post and writing on X: “When I visited Minnesota, what the ICE agents wanted more than anything was to work with local law enforcement so that situations on the ground didn’t get out of hand. The local leadership in Minnesota has so far refused to answer those requests.”

Also posting on X, defense secretary Pete Hegseth added to the criticism of Frey and Walz, as well as denigrating the victim: “Shame on the leadership of Minnesota — and the lunatics in the street. ICE > MN.”

Walz, in a press conference, referred to the federal narrative as “nonsense.”

“Minnesota’s justice system will have the last word” on Pretti’s killing, Walz said, adding, “the federal government cannot be trusted with this investigation.”



Source link

Tech

Humanscale’s New $15K Lounge Chair Is the Ultimate Home Office Workstation

Published

on

Humanscale’s New K Lounge Chair Is the Ultimate Home Office Workstation


The chair starts at $8,995, but that doesn’t include the side table or ottoman. Add those and it costs $10,995. The model pictured above uses Alpaca wool fabric and brings the cost up to $14,995. (There are more than 300 fabrics and colors to choose from, and the swiveling table comes in various woodgrains.) The Herman Miller Eames, of which the Diffrient Lounge also takes inspiration, costs roughly $8,500 today, depending on which leather you choose.

“The Eames is obviously an iconic design—it’s timeless, it’s beautiful—but it’s not something you can work comfortably in for a long time,” Silva says.

Levers on the edges of the armrest let you mechanically adjust the recline of the backrest and headrest.

Photograph: Julian Chokkattu

Don’t let the Lounge in the name fool you. Silva assures me that every chair the company designs is built with ergonomic comfort in mind, with the adjustable work surface and headrest allowing for different postures. While traditional lounge chairs focus on style, Silva says the Lounge prioritizes comfort. In my brief time on the chair, it indeed felt enveloping and cushy yet supportive. And the mechanical levers made it easy to shift the chair into a more active sitting position or a more relaxing posture, without disrupting the ergonomics with a laptop on the table.

Diffrient had been tinkering with the idea of a lounge chair that could double as a workstation for a long time, Silva says, and believed that technology allowed people to work in different ways.

“The chair acknowledges the fact that creativity and productivity don’t necessarily happen when you’re tied to your desk,” he says. “They happen in different postures; more relaxed or moving around the office, and this chair supports those transitions.”

King recites a famous quote from Diffrient: “The best chair is a bed.” When you sit upright, your weight compresses your spine, but when you lean back, a large portion of that weight goes into the backrest, so when you’re lying down, there’s significantly less pressure on your spine. “Reclining is really healthy,” King says. “He always thought it would be a good way to work.”

Luxe Seat

How does a chair come to cost $15,000? Silva highlights Humanscale’s long-standing approach to simplicity. After all, it’s a hallmark of the original Freedom chair. While the Diffrient Lounge may not look very complex, that’s by design, cleverly masking the engineered mechanical system with clean lines and curves. There’s even some automation in the headrest. If you’re fully reclined and the headrest is in a forward position to support your head, as you come back up, the headrest will automatically go into a neutral position.

Image may contain Cushion and Home Decor

There are two USB-C ports on the chair to power your devices, which means the Diffrient Lounge needs to be connected to an outlet.

Photograph: Julian Chokkattu



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Ofcom sets out regulation to push UK gigabit broadband to ‘final phase’ | Computer Weekly

Published

on

Ofcom sets out regulation to push UK gigabit broadband to ‘final phase’ | Computer Weekly


UK communications regulator Ofcom has set out the regulatory structure which it believes will drive full-fibre gigabit broadband to reach almost all UK homes and businesses over the next two years.

In setting out its Telecoms Access Review (TAR) 2026-31, finalising plans for how it will enable further competition and investment in the sector, Ofcom has gained general acceptance of its plans from the UK’s disparate and sometimes fractious broadband ecosystem.

Essentially, the regulator says the availability of full-fibre broadband almost everywhere in the UK will lay the foundations for productivity gains across the UK, and according to projections in its Connected nations: Planned network deployments 2025 report, given what is described as “the right support”, full-fibre is set to reach almost 29 million properties by the end of 2027, equivalent to well over nine in 10.

With the broadband industry investing billions each year in bringing better broadband to communities up and down the country, Ofcom says UK gigabit roll-out is now reaching its end phase. Yet it emphasised that the job is not yet done, and to realise the productivity potential of full-fibre for the UK economy, as much of the country as possible must have access to it.

Ofcom says the next frontier for fibre is customers taking it up, with more than half of those eligible for an upgrade yet to make the change. It observed that people and businesses have more choice between broadband providers than ever before – around three-quarters have access to at least two networks, and nearly a third of the country can choose between three. This, it says, has meant “ever-better services at attractive prices”.

At the heart of the announcement is guidance on how Ofcom regulates UK broadband leader Openreach, building on its 2021 regulations regarding the BT-owned company.

Ofcom claims that since it introduced a new regulatory framework, it has driven competition between different broadband networks, meaning that fibre roll-out has been an infrastructure success story.

Protecting sustainable competition

Ofcom believes Openreach is retaining significant power in the market, and that the market is not at a point where it can remove regulation entirely. Indeed, it stressed that it was therefore maintaining rules around discounts and deals that could stifle investment and the development of sustainable competition.

Ofcom says that through its move, it is incentivising existing networks to invest while making it cheaper and easier for new entrants to the market to build using Openreach’s ducts and telegraph poles. As a result, Ofcom claims, the UK has seen one of the fastest rates of roll-out of full-fibre broadband in Europe, with industry investment ranging between £3bn and £6bn each year.

Among the market decisions it has made to support competition, Ofcom has mandated that Openreach’s competitors will continue to have access to its ducts and poles at “fair, cost-based” prices so they can deploy their own networks quickly and economically across the UK.

To protect quality of service in less densely populated parts of the UK, where Openreach is unlikely to face competition, Ofcom is introducing backstop standards around the speed and quality of repairs and installations for Openreach’s full-fibre services. Elsewhere, it expects competition to drive service quality.

In addition, to address concerns regarding affordability, Ofcom said it would cap the nominal price that Openreach can charge retail providers like Vodafone or Sky – who lease its infrastructure – for download speeds up to 80Mbps, rather than 40Mbps at present. The prices of higher-speed products will remain unregulated, so providers have an incentive to invest in networks that can deliver faster speeds.

And as part of its general transitioning to full-fibre networks and gradually shutting down old telephone exchanges, Ofcom said Openreach should not have to incur unnecessary costs for running two networks at the same time. It said it would progressively shift regulation away from copper services to full-fibre services, giving Openreach flexibility to encourage customers to migrate off its old copper network. Alongside its TAR plans, Ofcom said it would be consulting on the specific conditions for when price protections on copper-based services should be removed.

Ofcom’s decisions are set to take effect from 1 April 2026, and the regulator assured that if sustainable competition was still emerging in 2031, when its next review was due to take place, it expects to regulate in a way that supports it.

It also stressed that should it need to set price controls on Openreach in the future, it would have the opportunity to earn a return above the cost of its investment over time. Alternatively, it noted that if effective competition has emerged by the time of the next review, there would be no need to regulate beyond access to ducts and poles.

Commenting on the review’s need and aims, Ofcom’s group director for infrastructure and connectivity, Natalie Black, said: “Today marks a major milestone on the road to a better-connected, more productive Britain. Five years ago, we put in place new rules to drive competition between networks and get them building full-fibre broadband, which now reaches nearly eight in 10 homes and offices across the country.

“But our mission isn’t yet complete, and we’re creating the right conditions for the fibre roll-out in its final phase,” she said. “Our review of the rules has been an extensive and complex undertaking given the nature of the market, and we appreciate the considered engagement from the sector.”

Before the TAR was published, there was a worry in the UK’s broadband industry that it would be a charter to maintain Openreach’s market dominance. Yet broad response to the TAR has been balanced and positive across the board.

Mark Shurmer, managing director for regulation at Openreach, said: “No one is going further or faster than us to build the UK’s best network(s). Our investments help customers – and the country – do brilliant things, but they only happen when the environment is stable and supportive. That’s why Ofcom’s review is critical to the future of digital connectivity across the UK. We’ll continue to work with Ofcom to make sure the regulation set today will allow fair competition within that market to get the best results for consumers. This market is evolving rapidly and, with competition more intense than ever, it’s really important that regulation keeps pace with that change.”

Market consolidation and continued investment

Rajiv Datta, CEO at rival Nexfibre, said the TAR has outlined why Ofcom is right to prioritise regulatory stability – and why sustainable, nationwide competition to BT Openreach will only be achieved through market consolidation and continued investment.

“Ofcom is right to stay the course and prioritise regulatory stability,” he said. “This is not the moment to deregulate the incumbent; what’s needed is steady oversight and firm enforcement of the framework already in place.

“The reality is that sustainable, nationwide competition to BT Openreach will only be achieved through consolidation and continued investment. The fibre market remains too fragmented to deliver this on its own.

Nexfibre’s acquisition of Netomnia is an important step towards building the scale required to change that,” said Datta. “Now is the moment for clear action. The UK must show it is committed to supporting the investment needed to secure the long‑term digital infrastructure that will drive productivity, innovation and economic growth.”

A spokesperson for leading alternative broadband provider CityFibre said: “Ofcom is doubling down on its long-term strategy to promote sustainable infrastructure competition, continuing to strengthen the much-needed constraints on anti-competitive pricing from BT Openreach and recognising the importance of strong rival fibre networks to challenge the incumbents. The Telecoms Access Review provides CityFibre with a stable regulatory framework as we scale our network and bring the benefits of genuine infrastructure competition.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Justice Department Says Anthropic Can’t Be Trusted With Warfighting Systems

Published

on

Justice Department Says Anthropic Can’t Be Trusted With Warfighting Systems


The Trump administration argued in a court filing on Tuesday that it did not violate Anthropic’s First Amendment rights by designating the AI developer a supply-chain risk and predicted that the company’s lawsuit against the government will fail.

“The First Amendment is not a license to unilaterally impose contract terms on the government, and Anthropic cites nothing to support such a radical conclusion,” US Department of Justice attorneys wrote.

The response was filed in a federal court in San Francisco, one of two venues where Anthropic is challenging the Pentagon’s decision to sanction the company with a label that can bar companies from defense contracts over concerns about potential security vulnerabilities. Anthropic argues the Trump administration overstepped its authority in applying the label and preventing the company’s technologies from being used inside the department. If the designation holds, Anthropic could lose up to billions of dollars in expected revenue this year.

Anthropic wants to resume business as usual until the litigation is resolved. Rita Lin, the judge overseeing the San Francisco case, has scheduled a hearing for next Tuesday to decide whether to honor Anthropic’s request.

Justice Department attorneys, writing for the Department of Defense and other agencies in the Tuesday filing, described Anthropic’s concerns about potentially losing business as “legally insufficient to constitute irreparable injury” and called on Lin to deny the company a reprieve.

The attorneys also wrote that the Trump administration was motivated to act because of “concerns about Anthropic’s potential future conduct if it retained access” to government technology systems. “No one has purported to restrict Anthropic’s expressive activity,” they wrote.

The government argues that Anthropic’s push to limit how the Pentagon can use its AI technology led defense secretary Pete Hegseth to “reasonably” determine that “Anthropic staff might sabotage, maliciously introduce unwanted function, or otherwise subvert the design, integrity, or operation of a national security system.”

The Department of Defense and Anthropic have been fighting over potential restrictions on the company’s Claude AI models. Anthropic believes its models shouldn’t be used to facilitate broad surveillance of Americans and are not currently reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons.

Several legal experts previously told WIRED that Anthropic has a strong argument that the supply-chain measure amounts to illegal retaliation. But courts often favor national security arguments from the government, and Pentagon officials have described Anthropic as a contractor that has gone rogue and that its technologies cannot be trusted.

“In particular, DoW became concerned that allowing Anthropic continued access to DoW’s technical and operational warfighting infrastructure would introduce unacceptable risk into DoW supply chains,” Tuesday’s filing states. “AI systems are acutely vulnerable to manipulation, and Anthropic could attempt to disable its technology or preemptively alter the behavior of its model either before or during ongoing warfighting operations, if Anthropic—in its discretion—feels that its corporate ‘red lines’ are being crossed.”

The Defense Department and other federal agencies are working to replace Anthropic’s AI tools with products from competing tech companies in the next few months. One of the military’s top uses of Claude is through Palantir data analysis software, people familiar with the matter have told WIRED.

In Tuesday’s filing, the lawyers argued that the Pentagon “cannot simply flip a switch at a time when Anthropic currently is the only AI model cleared for use” on the department’s’s “classified systems and high-intensity combat operations are underway.” The department is working to deploy AI systems from Google, OpenAI, and xAI as alternatives.

A number of companies and groups, including AI researchers, Microsoft, a federal employee labor union, and former military leaders have filed court briefs in support of Anthropic. None have been filed in support of the government.

Anthropic has until Friday to file a counter response to the government’s arguments.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending