Searchable News & Info From Reliable Online Sources.
- What Happens If America Nationalizes AI?
AI companies are beginning to entertain the possibility that they could cease to exist. This notion was, until recently, more theoretical: A couple of years ago, an ex-OpenAI employee named Leopold Aschenbrenner wrote a lengthy memo speculating that the U.S. government might soon take control of the industry. By 2026 or 2027, Aschenbrenner wrote, an “obvious question” will be circling through the Pentagon and Congress: Do we need a government-led program for artificial general intelligence—an AGI Manhattan Project? He predicted that Washington would decide to go all in on such an effort.Aschenbrenner may have been prescient. Earlier this year, at the height of the Pentagon’s ugly contract dispute with Anthropic, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth warned that he could invoke the Defense Production Act (DPA), a Cold War–era law that he reportedly suggested would allow him to force the AI company to hand over its technology on whatever terms the Pentagon desired. The act is one of numerous levers the Trump administration can pull to direct, or even commandeer, AI companies. And the companies have been giving the administration plenty of reason to consider doing so.Future bots could help design and carry out biological, nuclear, and chemical warfare. They could be weaponized to take down power grids, monitor congressional emails, and black out major media outlets. These aren’t purely hypothetical concerns: Earlier this month, Anthropic announced it had developed a new AI model, Claude Mythos Preview, capable of orchestrating cyberattacks on the level of elite, state-sponsored hacking cells, potentially putting a private company’s cyber offense on par with that of the CIA and NSA. In an example of Mythos’s power, Anthropic researchers described how the model used a “moderately sophisticated multi-step exploit” to work around restrictions and gain broad internet access, then emailed a researcher—much to his surprise—while he was eating a sandwich in the park.Washington is getting antsy about the power imbalance. Over the past year, multiple senators have proposed legislation that would order federal agencies to explore “potential nationalization” of AI. Murmurs of possible tactics abound—including more talk within the administration of the DPA after Anthropic’s Mythos announcement, one person with knowledge of such discussions told us. Meanwhile, Silicon Valley is watching carefully. In recent weeks, Elon Musk, OpenAI’s CEO Sam Altman, and Palantir’s CEO Alex Karp have publicly spoken about the possibility of nationalization. Lawyers who represent Silicon Valley’s biggest AI firms are paying attention.So what if… [TheTopNews] Read More.4 days ago - It Took Charles a Lifetime to Be King. Now He Has to Deal With Trump.
“There are two tragedies in life,” the Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw once said. “One is not to get your heart’s desire. The other is to get it.” It’s easy to see King Charles III, the longest-serving heir apparent in British history, as a tragic figure. The king waited 73 long years to ascend the royal throne. Now three-and-a-half years into the job he craved his whole life, Charles faces myriad challenges: poor health, advancing years, estrangement from his California-dwelling son, and the Epstein-sized scandal enveloping his younger brother. And now this. What should have been a pinnacle moment in his reign — a state visit to America with all the pomp and ceremony that Washington can muster — has morphed into something much more serious: a high-stakes diplomatic mission to save Britain’s most important alliance. It’s hard for Americans to appreciate the importance of the trans-Atlantic relationship in Britain. While Pete Hegseth cracks jokes about the once “big, bad Royal Navy,” Brits have long known the state of the nation’s armed forces is depressingly underpowered. But this never much mattered, given the endlessly touted “special relationship” with the United States. Images of FDR and Winston Churchill sharing cocktails; Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher locked in embrace; Bill Clinton and Tony Blair as the West’s bright young things; form part of a postwar national mythology. The bond is unbreakable, Brits have told themselves for 80 years. No nation is closer to the U.S. This special relationship — partly real, partly imagined — has allowed an entire generation in Britain to grow up feeling untouchable, safe under the impenetrable shield of the U.S. military umbrella. When anti-Brexit campaigners tried to warn in 2016 that leaving the EU would be a risk to national security, they were laughed out of town. Europe doesn't keep us safe, the Brexiteers said, convincingly. That job belongs to NATO — the most successful defensive alliance in modern history. Sure enough, Britain voted to leave the EU in June 2016. Donald Trump was elected president four months later.It’s taken another decade of turmoil to bring us to this point, but NATO now looks holed below the water line. It’s a “paper tiger,” Trump has said repeatedly over recent weeks, dropping hint after hint that he may no longer adhere to NATO’s central tenet — that an attack on any one of its members is an attack on… [TheTopNews] Read More.4 days ago - A Lesson for Guarding the Presidential Line of Succession
In the chaotic swirl of events after President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, doctors feared that Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson had suffered a heart attack upon arrival at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas. The signs were ominous: Johnson’s face was ashen, and he was clutching his chest. “There was the real possibility that the No. 3 in the line of succession would become president,” the historian Michael Beschloss told me. Johnson was reportedly examined and a heart attack ruled out—but not before then–House Speaker John McCormack was told that he might be the next president. The declaration prompted a severe bout of vertigo in the 71-year-old.Few moments in history have so starkly exposed the vulnerabilities of the presidential line of succession—or the lack of clarity about how it is protected. Last night provided another illustration of them. If events at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner had gone differently, a gunman who breached security at the Washington Hilton could have reached a ballroom containing an unusually dense cluster of American power. The president and the vice president were seated a few feet apart. Congressional leadership and many Cabinet secretaries were also on hand. In other words, much of the presidential line of succession was in the same spot—and subject to the same vulnerabilities.Senator Chuck Grassley, 92 and third in line as president pro tempore of the Senate, was home in Iowa—his absence briefly making him one of the most important people in the country. The Correspondents’ Dinner is built for symbolism: the press, the presidency, and Washington’s political elite gathered in a single room, putting their differences aside in celebration of the First Amendment. But the failed attack highlighted the typically unspoken peril of such a gathering, with so many figures in the line of succession crammed into a ballroom packed so tightly with tables, chairs, and people that it was hard to move around—much less duck for cover.Jonathan Wackrow, a former Secret Service agent who served on the presidential detail, told me that the system for protecting the president—and those who might replace him in the event of incapacity—is far more fragmented than it appears. Responsibility for protecting senior officials is divided across multiple agencies: the Secret Service, the Capitol Police, and departmental security teams, each operating with different mandates and chains of command. That system functions best when those requiring protection are dispersed. When they converge, it runs… [TheTopNews] Read More.4 days ago - A Dark New Litmus Test for Power in WashingtonOn one level, the system worked. The perimeter held. A would-be assassin was tackled in the hallway outside the White House Correspondents’ Association’s annual dinner. The one bullet that found a human target—a U.S. Secret Service agent—was halted, in part, by the officer’s phone and bulletproof vest, according to a law-enforcement summary report that we reviewed. A counterassault team promptly swarmed the stage with assault rifles and night-vision equipment in case the lights were cut. The government’s top leaders—president, vice president, Cabinet officials, speaker of the House—were ushered to secure locations in a matter of minutes. No one died in the attack.But the collective sigh of relief and rounds of “I am fine” text messages last night belied a heaviness that administration officials and other dinner attendees were still processing this morning, even as Sunday brunches proceeded apace, albeit with more security and a newly somber sheen. This attack was different from the two prior assassination attempts on Donald Trump because the president was not the only apparent target. The alleged attacker wrote in a manifesto obtained by the New York Post that he was after “administration officials (not including Mr. Patel): they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest.”As the evening’s adrenaline faded this morning, this reality began setting in among Trump advisers, someone close to the White House told us. Had things gone differently, the nation’s top officials would have been in real danger. Personal security details are designed to protect the principals at all expense. If a presidential motorcade is attacked, there are contingency plans to have it split, leaving behind the junior staff and traveling press. The priority is clear: Get the president to safety. When the shots rang out last night at the Washington Hilton, multiple teams flooded into the rooms to find their protectees and get them out, climbing over chairs—in some cases with guns drawn or hand on holster—and sometimes leaving spouses, colleagues, and others to fend for themselves.Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was body-blocked by three agents as he walked from the ballroom. His wife, Cheryl Hines, was left to follow alone a few feet behind, climbing over barriers in a ball gown. Speaker Mike Johnson, who was away from his table when the shooting started, had to send armed officers to retrieve his wife, according to a journalist sitting near him. For the other Trump-administration officials and… [TheTopNews] Read More.5 days ago
- Top 10 Music Industry Executives Who Came Up From Urban Radio
Urban radio has historically been one of… [TheTopNews] Read More.5 days ago - Patients taking weight-loss drugs often make 5 critical mistakes, doctor warns
GLP-1 drugs (glucagon-like peptide-1s) have exploded in popularity in recent years – initially as a way to control diabetes and then as tools for weight loss.Growing research suggests that these drugs – which include semaglutide and tirzepatide – potentially have benefits beyond weight loss, with stronger evidence for cardiovascular and kidney health.Even so, experts caution that these medications are not foolproof — and using them the wrong way can undermine results or even create new health problems.OZEMPIC’S HEALTH BENEFITS KEEP GROWING, BUT ARE THE RISKS WORTH IT?Dr. Meena T. Malhotra, MD, a functional medicine doctor and weight-loss specialist in a suburb of Chicago, confirmed that she has seen myriad health improvements in patients taking GLP-1s – particularly those with diabetes who were "very sick.""We observed that this sick population was doing better than the diabetics who were on other diabetes medicines," she shared with Fox News Digital, noting that she observed improvements in brain health, memory, heart health, circulation, and liver and kidney function. "We realized there was more to the drug than just sugar control and weight loss."Malhotra said she believes many people can safely microdose GLP-1s, but she cautions against the following common mistakes.Anyone considering GLP-1s should first focus on adopting a healthy lifestyle, Malhotra emphasized – a view widely shared by endocrinologists and obesity medicine specialists.GLP-1 medications work by slowing gastric emptying, reducing appetite and improving insulin signaling. People with preexisting GI symptoms may be more prone to discomfort or intolerance, though responses vary and formal evidence is limited.JELLY ROLL'S WIFE SAYS WEIGHT-LOSS DRUG SENT HER INTO ‘WORST SUICIDAL DEPRESSION’Before beginning the medication, Malhotra recommends improving basic nutritional habits, such as increasing intake of whole, minimally processed foods, and prioritizing protein and fiber to support satiety and gut health.Even small improvements can lead to early weight loss, reduced fluid retention and improvements in insulin sensitivity, doctors agree. Once GLP-1 medications are started, these lifestyle modifications may reduce the necessary dose amount, result in fewer side effects and help preserve lean muscle mass.The growing trend of obtaining GLP-1 medications online without proper medical oversight can pose serious health risks, Malhotra warned."Nobody examines the patient – they just fill out a form and the medicine shows up at their door," she said.WEIGHT-LOSS DOCTOR SHARES HOW GLP-1S COULD REWIRE BODY AGAINST DISEASEPatients should see a medical provider for a thorough exam and bloodwork before starting the drugs, the doctor emphasized."If something… [TheTopNews] Read More.5 days ago
The Searchable USWebDaily.com and TheTopNews NewsBank Helps You Be Better Informed, Faster! Spread The Word.
