Blog

  • Nukes and AI Deepen New Mexico’s Water Crisis

    This story was originally published by High Country News.

    High atop a plateau in northern New Mexico, Los Alamos National Laboratory is facing its biggest expansion since the World War II-era Manhattan Project, the top-secret government effort to produce the world’s first atomic weapons. The current expansion will require a colossal use of resources, including one that New Mexico has in short supply these days — water.

    Last month, the U.S. Department of Energy projected that the Los Alamos expansion would require around 504 million gallons of water annually — about 1.4 million gallons of water per day — for at least another decade. By comparison, a single New Mexico resident uses about 81 gallons per day.

    The lab started making plutonium bomb cores, or “pits” for a new generation of warheads well before an environmental impact statement was published in March. In its latest move, however, the Department of Energy has set its sights on an even larger — and thirstier — expansion.

    Plans include building a new 100,000-square-foot facility dedicated solely to artificial intelligence supercomputers, along with one or more microreactors, a compact nuclear reactor designed to generate small-scale power and facilities for staging nuclear waste.

    The expanded lab would use more water in one day than the average farmer uses in a single year, said Joni Arends, executive director of Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety. “But farmers are growing food, whereas the lab is building nuclear weapons,” she said.

    Dimensions are for visualization using estimates for sizing versus exact scale. Luna Anna Archey/High Country News

    *   *   *

    Most of the water going to the lab comes from the Española Basin, a sole-source aquifer that stretches across almost 3,000 miles of north-central New Mexico. It currently supplies eight tribes and towns, including Santa Fe, the state capital, as well as the town of Los Alamos, where wells have been declining 1 to 2 feet per year since the 1970s.

    “Increasing temperatures and decreasing precipitation totals will strain existing water resources,” a recent water conservation plan authored by Los Alamos County warned. One of “the biggest factors” out of its control, and the control of the Department of Energy, it added, is a “changing climate.” Efforts are currently underway to map the Española Basin to better manage its water resources.

    Anxiety has been on the rise in recent years concerning the growing water shortages linked to climate change. Snowpack has continually been at record lows, and growing seasons have begun to shift and shorten in recent years from lack of precipitation.

    More broadly, New Mexico faces a “looming groundwater crisis,” as aquifers statewide are depleted with little chance of recharging, a report from the New Mexico Groundwater Alliance said last year. The report cited irrigation for large-scale agricultural operations as the state’s biggest guzzler.

    By 2050, estimates show the state’s water shortage will amount to 750,000 acre-feet of water, or some 2.5 trillion gallons. The Pojoaque Basin Aquifer, which is adjacent to the Española Basin, is now closed to any new water development to protect the high-priority water rights of four local tribes following a multi-decade lawsuit.

    New Mexico faces a “looming groundwater crisis,” as aquifers statewide are depleted.

    The lab’s expansion — which will grow its footprint by about 30% — could almost double its water use compared to previous years. Yet the federal government insists that the impacts of the expansion would be negligible.

    “Barring potential water quality issues, continued pumping of the regional aquifer at current rates is likely to be sustainable for hundreds of years,” its environmental impact statement said, even considering “increasingly erratic and damaging weather patterns.” Federal environmental law only mandates further analysis if the lab exceeds 542 million gallons annually, it went on, a number that corresponds to the amount of water rights the lab holds. The Department of Energy did not respond to inquiries regarding when the lab would realize its increased water use.

    Still, staying below its maximum adds up to about 30% of all water consumption in Los Alamos County, which supplies water to the lab.

    “They’re going to need to use reclaimed water and their water rights availability to meet their expanded growth,” said Philo Shelton, manager of the county Public Utilities Department. But discussions about how the lab plans to meet those water demands — and how much reclaimed water it will use — are still in the early stages, he added.

    “Our other challenge is the chromium plume,” Shelton added, referring to underground contamination from hexavalent chromium, a highly toxic carcinogen that seeped into the aquifer decades ago from lab operations. When the contamination was found within a quarter of a mile of a drinking water well, the county ultimately shut it off, out of an abundance of caution.

    “That limits our ability to supply water with a high-producing well,” he said, adding that the county is in talks with the Department of Energy about drilling a new one. 

    *   *   *

    The increased water use at the Los Alamos National Laboratory comes at a time when communities in New Mexico and across the West are pushing back against the growing water demands of technological facilities, including AI data centers. In fact, according to the impact statement, much of Los Alamos’ increased water use will be for a “future supercomputer” that is expected to be installed in 2027. Two supercomputers have already come online in recent years and will “explore the tremendous opportunities of artificial intelligence,” Tom Mason, the lab’s director, said at a town hall earlier this year.

    Public sentiment has been strongly against similar nearby projects, including Project Jupiter, the controversial AI data center campus slated for southern New Mexico that is projected to use about 1 million gallons per day. Meanwhile, Meta’s data center in central New Mexico is permitted to use 163 million gallons a year.

    The Department of Energy allowed public comment on a draft of the impact statement last year. But a day after that period ended, an executive order passed by President Donald Trump rescinding the National Environmental Protection Act went into effect, essentially curbing local residents’ ability to weigh in on the federal government’s final decision to expand the lab and increase its water use. “What’s lost is people’s right to self-determination,” Arends said.

    Climate change and its impacts, including drought, were once recognized as threats to national security. Now, as water helps power the next chapter of national security, that recognition has all but evaporated. 

    The post Nukes and AI Deepen New Mexico’s Water Crisis appeared first on Truthdig.

  • A Bridge to Somewhere: How to Link Your Mastodon, Bluesky, or Other Federated Accounts

    One of the central promises of open social media services is interoperability—the idea that wherever you personally decide to post doesn’t require others to be there just to follow what you have to say. Think of it like a radio broadcast: you want to reach people and don’t care where they are or what device they’re using. For example, in theory, a Bluesky user can follow someone on Mastodon or Threads without having to create a Mastodon or Threads account. But these systems are still a work in progress, and you might need to tweak a few things to get it working correctly.

    Right now, broadcasting your message across social platforms can be a funky experience at best, deliberately broken up by oligopolists. The idea of the open web was baked into the internet via protocols like HTML and RSS that made it easy for anyone to visit a website or follow most blogs. The fact social media isn’t similarly open reflects an intentional choice to privatize the internet. 

    Bridging and managing your posts so they’re viewable outside a singular source is part of the broader philosophy of POSSE, short for Post Own Site Syndicate Elsewhere (sometimes its Post Own Site, Share Everywhere). Instead of managing several accounts across different services, you post once to one primary site (which might be your personal website, or just one social media account), then set it up so it automatically publishes everywhere else. This way, it doesn’t matter where you or your audience is, and they’re not walled off by account registration requirements. 

    We’ll come back around to POSSE at the end of this post, but for now, let’s assume you just want your current main open social media account to actually have a chance to reach the most people it can. 

    Why Post to the Open Social Web

    Because the Fediverse and ATmosphere use different protocols, we need to use a third-party tool so accounts can communicate with each other. For that, we’ll need a bridge. As the name suggests, a bridge can connect one social media account to another, so you can post once and spread your message across several places. This isn’t just some niche concept: major blogging platforms like WordPress and Ghost integrate posting to the Fediverse.

    Bridging is an important facet of POSSE, but also something more people should consider, even if they don’t run their own websites. For example, if you don’t want to create a Threads account just to interact with your one friend who uses that platform, you shouldn’t have to. The good news is, you don’t. There are several bridging services, like Fedisky, RSS Parrot, and pinhole, but Bridgy Fed is currently the simplest to use, so we’ll focus on that. 

    How to Post to Bluesky from Mastodon

    From your Mastodon account (or other Fediverse account, for simplicity’s sake we’ll stick to Mastodon throughout), search for the username @bsky.brid.gy@bsky.brid.gy and follow that account. Once you do, the account will follow you back and you’ll be bridged and people can find you from their Bluesky account. You should also get a DM with your bridged username. If you don’t see the @bsky.brid.gy@bsky.brid.gy user when you search, your Mastodon instance may be blocking the bridging tool. 

    Threads users who have enabled Fediverse sharing will be able to find you with your standard Mastodon username (ie, @your_user_name@mastodon.social), but if they haven’t enabled sharing, they will not be able to see your account. While this search is still a beta feature, you might find it easier to share the full URL, which would look like this: https://www.threads.net/fediverse_profile/@your_user_name@mastodon.social

    People on Bluesky can find you by: Either searching for your Mastodon username, or if that doesn’t work, @your_user_name.instance.ap.brid.gy. For example, if your username is @eff@mastodon.social, it would appear as @eff.mastodon.social.ap.brid.gy.

    An example of a Mastodon username from the Bluesky web client.

    How to Post to Mastodon and Bluesky from Threads

    Yes, Threads is technically on the Fediverse, and you can bridge your Threads account to Mastodon or Bluesky (unless you’re in Europe, where the feature is disabled), but it’s a different process than on Bluesky and Mastodon.

    • Open Settings > Account > Fediverse Sharing and set the option to “On.” This will make your posts visible to Mastodon (or other Fediverse) users, and vice versa. 
    • Once the Fediverse sharing is enabled, you’ll likely need to wait a week, then you can bridge to Bluesky. Search for and follow the @bsky.brid.gy@bsky.brid.gy account (it may take some digging to find it, but if that doesn’t work you can try visiting the profile page directly

    People on Mastodon (or other Fediverse accounts) and Bluesky can find you by: Mastodon users can find you at, @your_threads_username@threads.net while Bluesky users will find you at, @your_threads_username.threads.net.ap.brid.gy (seriously, that will be the username). Note that some Mastodon instances may block Threads users entirely.

    an example of a threads post viewed from mastodon

    An example of a Threads username from the Mastodon web client.

    an example of a threads user profile viewed from bluesky

    An example of a Threads username from the Bluesky web client.

    How to Post to Mastodon and Threads from Bluesky

    From your Bluesky (or other ATProto) account, search for the username, “@ap.brid.gy” and follow that account. Once you do, the account will follow you back and you’ll be bridged, so people can follow you from Mastodon or other Fediverse accounts. You should also get a DM with your bridged username.

    People on Mastodon (or other Fediverse account) and Threads can find you by: Your username will appear as @your_bluesky_username@bsky.brid.gy. For example, if your Bluesky username is @eff@bsky.social, it would appear as @eff.bksy.social@bsky.brid.gy.

    an example of a bluesky user profile viewed from mastofon

    An example of a Bluesky username from the Mastodon web client.

    How to Post Everywhere from Your Own Website

    You can bridge more than social media accounts. If you have your own website, you can bridge that too (as long as it supports microformats and webmention, or an Atom or RSS feed. If you have a blog, there’s a good chance you’re already good to go). When you do so, the bridged account will either post the full text (or image) of whatever you post to your personal site, or a link to that content,  depending on how your website is set up. You’ll also probably want to log into your Bridgy user page so you can manage the account. 

    Where people can find your bridged account: Usually, a user can just search for your website’s URL on their decentralized social network of choice, or enter it on the Bridgy Fed page. But if that doesn’t work, they can try @yourdomain.com@web.brid.gy from Mastodon or @yourdomain.com.web.brid.gy from Bluesky.

    an example of a website profile viewed from mastodon

    An example of a bridged website username in the Mastodon web client.

    How Your Account Username Looks on Each Platform

    Examples of how each social media username looks on other platforms

    You’re Bound to Run Into Some Quirks

    • Sometimes messages take a little while to crossover between networks, and sometimes they don’t crossover at all.
    • You can’t log into a bridged account like a regular account, but Bridgy Fed does provide some tools to see incoming notifications and recent activity in case they’re not coming through properly.
    • ActivityPub and ATProto don’t have the same feature set, so you will have certain capabilities for one account you might not have in another. For example, you can edit posts on Mastodon, but not on Bluesky. If you edit a post that’s bridged from Mastodon to Bluesky, the Bluesky post will not be updated. 
    • Replies can sometimes get lost, especially if the person (or people) replying to you doesn’t have sharing turned on.
    • Ownership of accounts can get weird. For example, if you post to your own website and use a tool like WordPress or Ghost for federation (more info below), you don’t necessarily get access to a “normal” social media account, with a standard login and password.
    • And more! This is still a work in progress that has some technical quirks, but it’s improving all the time, and it’s best to keep telling yourself that troubleshooting is part of the fun.

    Other Cool Stuff You Can Do

    As mentioned up top, there’s a lot more you can do, and an increasing number of tools are making this process simpler. Bridgy Fed is one way to post to more places from a single account, but it’s far from the only way to do so. Here are just a few examples.

    • Micro.blog is a paid service where you can blog from your own domain name, then post automatically to Mastodon, Bluesky, Threads, Tumblr, Nostr, LinkedIn, Medium, Pixelfed, and Flickr.
    • Ghost is a blogging and newsletter platform that offers direct integration with the Fediverse, as well as support for Bluesky. WordPress offers the option to join the Fediverse through a community plugin. Other newsletter platforms, like Buttondown, also have plans for federation. 
    • Surf.social is a landing page and social media utility where you can show off all your various accounts (Federated or not). From the reader point of view, you can follow one publications numerous types of posts in one place. For example, 404 Media’s Surf.social feed includes its YouTube feed, podcast feed, and its journalist’s social media posts.
    • If you think these new handles are a bit ugly, you can use a custom domain for Bluesky or fediverse account from your website. 

    Of course, there are plenty of other tools, blogging platforms, and other utilities out there to help facilitate posting and bridging accounts, with new ones coming along every day. 

    With proper support, time, and effort, eventually we will all be able to seamlessly interact across platforms, take our follows and followers to other services when a platform no longer suits our needs, and interact with a variety of web content regardless of what platform hosts it. Until then, we still need to do some DIY work, support the services we want to succeed, and push for more platforms and services to support federated protocols.

  • Gang-controlled streets, shuttered newsrooms: How violence is eroding Haiti’s media

    Journalists working in Haiti are under constant threat of death or injury from rapidly expanding criminal gangs, as they continue to report news and information which they hope will help keep fellow citizens safe.
  • World News in Brief: Aung San Suu Kyi released from prison, Israel’s new death penalty, Cambodia convictions, healthcare inequalities in South America

    Former Myanmar State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi has been transferred from prison to house arrest, with her sentence reduced under a prisoner amnesty linked to a Buddhist holiday. 
  • Attacks on media workers must end, UN urges

    War in the Middle East has made Lebanon the deadliest country for media workers so far this year, but practically no country offers a safe environment in which to be a journalist, according to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. 
  • “It Was Like They Crushed a Beautiful Flower”: Families Speak Out on the Harms of ECT

    “It Was Like They Crushed a Beautiful Flower”: Families Speak Out on the Harms of ECT

    Editor’s note: first published by Mad in America on April 28th 2026:

    A new international study finds most relatives report no improvement in symptoms and diminished quality of life after electroconvulsive therapy.

    Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a controversial practice, with recent research finding harm, as well as a lack of efficacy and informed consent. A new article published in Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice finds the majority of relatives and friends of people that have been exposed to ECT report that overall quality of life is diminished afterwards. This research, led by independent scholar Christopher Harrop, also finds that a majority of participants reported no improvement in the symptoms ECT was meant to treat, with many believing it actually made the symptoms worse. In line with similar research, the current work reports that memory loss is common with ECT. The authors, including John Read from the University of East London, write:

    “Clearly, some people do feel that ECT had a dramatic positive, sometimes life- saving, effect on their relative or friend that ‘brought the person back’ to them. But three times as many people reported negative impacts than positive ones. A minority wrote about short- term benefits and long- term damage. The majority wrote, often with great emotion (including anger and despair) only about their distress at witnessing the damage done to a loved one by ECT, and about the loss of the person they had once known.”

    One of the participants wrote the following about the effects of ECT on their mother:

    “I saw my beautiful radiant creative multi- talented mother: scientist, activist, poet and writer, community leadership, in addition to all the above, she played guitar and piano and taught folk dance, become a withdrawn, fearful, dependent person who, for many years, looked at her feet when she walked, so that she would not lose her balance or fall. It was like they crushed a beautiful flower.”

    Harms Associated with ECT

    Past research has linked ECT with harm. People exposed to ECT have reported memory losscognitive issues, fatigue, emotional blunting, loss of vocabulary, and reduced quality of life. One piece of research found that nearly all (96.9%) ECT recipients reported at least one negative effect, with memory loss being the most commonly reported harm. One person that was exposed to ECT reported the memory loss was extreme, “like having Alzheimer’s, and being fully cognizant of it.” Some ECT recipients have also reported trauma and retraumatization from the experience. While ECT has been touted in the past for its ability to prevent suicide, one study found no such benefit, with some data indicating suicide risk may actually be higher after ECT. Research has also linked ECT to heart problems and brain changes that are associated with worse long-term outcomes.

    Study Details

    The goal of the current work was to investigate the perspectives of friends and relatives of ECT recipients on the positive and negative effects of ECT. The authors used the online survey tool Qualtrics to share a survey with mental health organizations all over the world. The survey was developed based both on past research as well as the experiences of three authors that had received ECT. The survey included a combination of yes/no, multiple choice, and open-ended questions. To be eligible for inclusion in the current work, participants had to be at least 18 years old and be a friend or family member of someone that received ECT with an understanding of how ECT affected their friend or family member. In total, the authors examined survey responses from 286 participants. This study was part of a larger investigation into the effects of ECT. Results from the 858 ECT recipients that were surveyed as part of the same research are published elsewhere.

    The open-ended survey questions were analyzed and grouped into categories and overarching themes by a single author. These categories and themes were developed directly from the data and reported without interpretation from the authors.

    The majority of respondents were from the US (37%) and the UK (28%). Other countries represented in the current work include Australia, Spain, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, France, Germany, Guatemala, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Sweden, Turkey, and Uruguay. The overwhelming majority of ECT recipients were white (89%). Most ECT recipients were female (68%). The participants themselves were most commonly daughters of ECT recipients (19.4%), followed by mothers (14.8%), and sisters (10.6%).

    Forty-two-point-four percent of participants reported that ECT made the problem it was meant to treat worse in their loved one with another 12.5% reporting no change. This means the symptoms ECT was meant to treat did not improve according to a majority of participants (54.9%) with 45.1% reporting they noticed improvements in the presenting symptoms. The majority of participants (61%) reported that ECT had a negative effect on their loved one’s overall quality of life compared to 32.3% that believed their loved one’s quality of life was improved. Six-point-eight percent saw no change.

    One participant wrote:

    “My beautiful, brilliant, motivated sister- in- law often cannot talk at all. She no longer can walk. She cannot prepare herself food. She is so courageous. She does not remember her childhood. She can show you a photograph and tell you what someone has told her about that childhood moment.”

    Another participant believed ECT made their loved one more suicidal. This participant also reported the doctor that pushed for ECT did not properly consider the circumstances around their loved one’s distress:

    “She was more suicidal, not less, and was dramatically less functional because of memory and cognitive damage. It closed off her ability to benefit from other paths to healing. The doctor was an ‘ECT specialist’ and did not seem capable of taking into account the effect of the many losses and stressors she was experiencing.”

    Overall, participants viewed ECT as more harmful than helpful. When asked “overall, how helpful was ECT,” 60.1% of respondents answered “not at all.” Forty percent believed ECT was helpful, including 21% that reported it was “very” helpful, 10.5% saying “somewhat”, and 8.5% saying “slightly. When asked “overall, how harmful was ECT,” 53.4% said “very”, 17.9% said “somewhat”, and 9.6% said “slightly.” This means 80.9% of respondents believed ECT was harmful to some extent. Just 19.1% reported that ECT was “not at all” harmful.

    One family member described ECT as follows:

    “Devastating, her life will be forever negatively impacted and she likely will be battling the after effects on her health for the rest of her life.”

    Another participant reported that ECT had completely disabled their loved one:

    “Completely left her disabled, needs a wheelchair, often stops breathing when stimuli is overpowering, her cognition is diminished, her memory is gone.”

    More than one third of participants (34.2%) believed that ECT had caused brain damage in their loved one, with 47.7% saying they were unsure about brain damage and 18.1% reporting no brain damage. Coercion was common in the administration of ECT according to participants, with 47.1% saying their loved one voluntarily consented, 31.7% reporting that their loved one gave consent under pressure, and 21.3% saying ECT was involuntary.

    One participant said “she was permanently disabled by the forced ECT,” with another reporting that their faith in the mental health system was forever diminished due to the way their loved was was forced into ECT:

    “It forever changed my views of the mental health system, and of forced treatment, and of psychiatrists—making me have no respect for them, and a concern and fear of their extraordinary legal powers.”

    Some participants said they were misinformed about the efficacy of ECT:

    “After initially trusting the medical judgement of the psychiatrist I researched it in some detail and was appalled by the non scientific nature of the intervention.” Another said, “I am very angry that I was misinformed and misled about the harm that ECT does and its effectiveness.”

    Another participant suspected that doctors prescribing ECT may not have the best interest of their patients in mind:

    “Serious loss of faith in the medical community at large. Great concern that Drs. prescribe this treatment to make big money for hospitals and themselves and not to actually help the patients.”

    Participants reported significant memory issues in their loved ones after ECT, with 60.7% indicating some level of impairment in remembering things that occurred recently and 73.3% reporting problems with remembering things that happened before ECT. Twenty-one of 25 other adverse effects were reported by at least half of respondents, including:

    • Difficulty concentrating (79.1%)
    • Emotional Blunting (72.6%)
    • Losing train of thought (71.5%)
    • Loss of independence (71.5%)
    • Fatigue (73.3%)
    • Relationship problems (70.2%)
    • Difficulty navigating (67.9%)
    • Loss of Job (54.8%)
    • Difficulty driving (64.5%)
    • Difficulty reading (53.6%)
    • Difficulty cooking (67.5%)
    • Difficulty using the computer (61%)
    • Difficulty shopping (61%)
    • Difficulty with money (63.8%)
    • Loss of vocabulary (63.3%)
    • Headaches (59.6%)
    • Sensitivity to noise (51.9%)
    • Slurred speech (55.1%)
    • Difficulty recognizing faces (53.6%)
    • Shaky hands (52.3%)

    Participants also reported that their loved ones had issues with falling over (43.6%), sensitivity to light (38.9%), walking into things (35.4%), and seizures/convulsions (23.3%).

    Some friends and family members expressed guilt at having not done more to stop their loved one from receiving ECT.

    “I feel guilty that I wasn’t able to stop it. I feel like I let her down. I was supposed to protect her,” said one family member. Another reported, “decades later I am still devastated that I did not or could not prevent it from happening, that I didn’t understand enough at the time, was not forceful enough to help him fight more legally to prevent it.”

    Participants described the results of ECT as terrifying:

    “How did her ECT impact me? It’s terrifying. I feel helpless,” said one participant. “I was terrified by so much cruelty,” reported another.

    Others believed ECT had traumatized their loved one, with one saying “it’s traumatizing. I can still hear the fear in her voice.”

    This research had several notable limitations. As the survey invitation was shared on social media by authors that had been critical of ECT in the past, there may have been some bias in recruiting towards people with a negative experience. Survey replies were based on memory and could have been biased by misremembering. These accounts were mostly secondhand. Some observed adverse effects reported by participants could have been caused by things other than ECT, such as aging. The survey was written in English and not translated to other languages. This means the experiences of non-English speakers would not be included in this data.

    Informed Consent and ECT

    Fifty-three percent of participants in the current work reported that their loved one was either forced into ECT, or was pressured to give consent. According to both research and lived experience, this is common when it comes to ECT. One ECT recipient reported feeling pressure to consent, not being able to remember actually signing the consent forms, and having no memory of being told about the adverse effects associated with ECT. A 2026 study found that a majority of patients referred to ECT did not receive adequate information on the procedure. Many participants in the same study were exposed to misinformation about ECT correcting a mythical chemical imbalance and few were told that ECT could cause heart problems and long-term or permanent memory loss. One case study even recommended using ECT to restore decision making capacity and gain informed consent for drug treatment during the period after ECT when research says “new learning is impaired.” In other words, this psychiatrist was advocating for obtaining “informed consent” from patients that likely could not understand what they were being told.

    ****

    Harrop, C., Cunliffe, S., Hancock, S. P., Johnstone, L., Morrison, L., & Read, J. (2026). An international survey of the relatives and friends of electroconvulsive therapy recipients. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice. (Link)

    The post “It Was Like They Crushed a Beautiful Flower”: Families Speak Out on the Harms of ECT appeared first on Mad in the UK.

  • Report Links Piracy to Drugs, Weapons, and the Mafia; Calls for U.S. Site-Blocking

    Report Links Piracy to Drugs, Weapons, and the Mafia; Calls for U.S. Site-Blocking

    Links between piracy and organized crime have been around for several decades.

    The framing first emerged in the late 1990s, when the IFPI raised concerns about transborder smuggling of pirated CDs by criminal networks. Back then, most piracy took place offline.

    A terrorism angle was added to the mix in 2003, when the U.S. House held a hearing on piracy’s “links to organized crime and terrorism.” Four months later, Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble told Congress that intellectual property crime had become “the preferred method of funding for a number of terrorist groups.”

    In December that year, the messaging made it into a new campaign by the UK anti-piracy group FACT, warning moviegoers that “piracy funds organised crime” and “piracy funds terrorism.”

    The most pivotal study appeared in 2009, when a RAND report linked film piracy, organized crime, and terrorism. This movie industry-funded report was not without critique, as it blurred the line between counterfeiting and piracy, while evidence for structural crime connections was missing.

    Nonetheless, the RAND study introduced case studies that have been cited ever since. This includes the Barakat Network in the Tri-Border Area, D-Company in India, and the Provisional IRA in Northern Ireland, which all reappeared in a new study this week.

    Report: Organized. Piracy. Crime.

    The new report titled “Organized. Piracy. Crime.” was released by anti-piracy group IP House and the Digital Citizens Alliance (DCA). Despite the long history described here, the report describes online piracy as “a new flavor of organized crime,” not something that has been around for decades.

    Or, as IP-House puts it on LinkedIn: “Piracy is not what it used to be. It has evolved into something far more structured and sophisticated.”

    While the old counterfeiting references are not completely gone, the new report offers several new insights and confirms that times have changed. In 2009, the largest pirate sites were still operated by people who started out as hobbyists with a passion for technology and file-sharing. The same can’t be said for many large pirate streaming networks that operate today.

    Piracy Networks as Organized Crime

    The new report cites more than a dozen recent enforcement actions to argue that today’s pirate streaming networks meet the formal definitions of organized crime set by Interpol, Europol, and the UN. The cases come from Spain, Italy, Brazil, Canada, India, and the United States, among others.

    The most prominent example is the high-profile European “Kratos” takedown that took place in November 2024, which targeted an IPTV operation that reportedly served 22 million subscribers across multiple countries.

    The report mentions that raids across eleven countries found $1.9 million in cryptocurrency, $46,000 in cash, and “drugs and weapons.” The report sees this as evidence that piracy operators now sit alongside more traditional criminal trades.

    From the report
    police

    Several other IPTV operations have also been connected to other types of crime. The Spanish ‘Operation Fake,’ for example, targeted an IPTV enterprise that allegedly combined content theft with cryptocurrency mining, property fraud, drug trafficking, and money laundering.

    Italy is prominently featured too, with the report referencing a former pirate operator turned informant who told Italian television that “those who pay for IPTV are funding the Camorra.” These links between IPTV operations and the Mafia are not new, but they remain difficult to verify through public records.

    A Multi-Layered Model

    A clear line needs to be drawn between hard evidence, such as weapons and drug seizures, and hearsay. However, those who have been observing the piracy landscape over the past 20 years have clearly seen more organized and money-driven operations emerge.

    Where pirate sites would previously foster a sense of community, modern streaming operations often use a franchise model, sourcing pirated content and complete pirate site scripts through a “Piracy as a Service” model.

    The report recognizes and documents this shift and argues that piracy has adopted a franchise structure that mirrors organized crime more broadly. Among other things, it mentions the 2019 takedown of Xtream Codes, a management platform that powered thousands of IPTV brands worldwide, as a key example. Wholesale operators sold turnkey kits to retail-level resellers, the report says, leaving the core operation insulated when downstream services were shut down.

    This organizational structure, where various parts of piracy operators are compartmentalized, was also used by KickassTorrents, Z-Library, and the SPARKS group, the report notes. Importantly, however, it does not connect these examples to other types of crime.

    The IP House and DCA report offers a detailed overview of the piracy landscape, moving toward organized and profit driven operations. It is fair to say that piracy is no longer the realm of copyleft or anarchist hobbyists. At the same time, not all piracy operations are created equal, and the cases collected in the report cover a wide range of business models, scales, and degrees of sophistication.

    This will be something for policymakers to keep in mind when the report lands on their desks.

    Report Calls on U.S. Congress to Implement Site Blocking

    After spending most of its 42 pages arguing that piracy networks are now organized crime, the report closes with a policy section directed at the U.S. Congress. Specifically, the report recommends site-blocking legislation, noting that this blocking approach is already adopted by “more than 50 countries.”

    In addition to site blocking, the report also calls for harsher penalties, payment-processor obligations, and expanded Treasury Department authority to designate foreign piracy operations as “primary money laundering concerns.”

    There is some tension between the report’s threat model and its proposed solution.

    The report describes piracy operations as sophisticated, adaptive criminal organizations that diversify across revenue streams. If site blocking works by lowering that revenue, these criminals may shift their focus to other endeavors, such as drug trafficking, human trafficking, and weapons smuggling.

    Speaking with TorrentFreak, IP House CEO Jan van Voorn says that site blocking doesn’t answer all problems and that other crimes remain a separate challenge. However, he notes that doing nothing is worse.

    “By cutting off a low-risk, high-margin revenue stream, site-blocking targets how organized networks monetize piracy to fund broader transnational activity. It’s not a silver bullet, but a practical tool to add friction and reduce illicit income,” he says.

    “Doing nothing leaves a highly profitable channel intact. More broadly, different criminal activities require the right legal tools. Site-blocking addresses piracy, and where additional measures are needed to combat other crimes, those should be considered as well.”

    The recommendation comes at a time when lawmakers in U.S. Congress are working on a bipartisan and bicameral site-blocking bill. As a result, the lobbying efforts have clearly started to pick up.

    Earlier this week, the Motion Picture Association (MPA) used World IP Day to make a similar site-blocking pitch. In addition, a new MPA-funded study on the links between piracy and cyberthreats in Latin America (pdf) also references site blocking as a potential countermeasure.

    Whether the renewed U.S. site-blocking push will succeed, and whether it can address the organized crime or cybersecurity threats it claims to target, remains to be seen.

    From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

  • Weekly Roundup: May 1

    On Monday, we brought you our spring scouting report on some of the hottest new LPE and LPE-adjacent articles. People are calling it “sold gold and ton heavy,” a “fabulous list,” and “roughly 1.2 million words of scholarship that I now need to find time to read.” On Wednesday, Andrew Miller argued that as personalized pricing and consumer profiling spread, hidden patterns of advantage and…

    Source

  • Scientific Censor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya Doesn’t Realize He’s the Medical Establishment Now & It’s His Job to Generate Evidence for the American People

    I don’t understand why public health figures like Jay Bhattacharya who controlled 58 billion dollars of funding uh didn’t use that money to study it definitively and with running high quality trials.

    The post Scientific Censor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya Doesn’t Realize He’s the Medical Establishment Now & It’s His Job to Generate Evidence for the American People first appeared on Science-Based Medicine.