Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is seeking permission from the California city of San Clemente to install an Anduril Industries surveillance tower on a cliff that would allow for constant monitoring of entire coastal neighborhoods.
The proposed tower is Anduril’s Sentry, part of the Autonomous Surveillance Tower (AST) program. While CBP says it will primarily monitor the coastline for boats carrying migrants, it will actually be installed 1.5 miles inland, overlooking the bulk of the 62,000-resident city. By CBP’s own public statement, the system–which combines video, radar, and computer vision–is “constantly scanning” for movement and identifying and tracking objects an AI algorithm decides are of interest. Depending on the model–the photos provided by CBP indicate it is a long range maritime model–the camera could see as far as nine miles, which would cover the entire city and potentially see as far as neighboring Dana Point.
“The AST utilize advanced computer vision algorithms to autonomously detect, identify, and track items of interest (IoI) as they transit through the towers field of view,” CBP writes in a privacy threshold analysis. “The system can determine if an IoI is a human, animal, or vehicle without operator intervention. The system then generates and transmits an alert to operators with the location and images of the IoI for adjudication and response.”
On April 28, local residents and Oakland Privacy, a privacy- and anti-surveillance-focused citizens’ coalition, are holding a town hall to inform the public about the dangers of this technology. We urge people to attend to better understand what’s at stake.
“The planned deployment of an Anduril tower along a heavily used Orange County coastline 75 miles from the border demonstrates that the militarization of the border region is rapidly moving northwards and across the entire state,” writes Oakland Privacy.
City officials raised concerns about resident privacy and proposed that a lease agreement include a prohibition on surveilling neighborhoods. CBP rejected that proposal, instead saying that they would configure the tower to “avoid” scanning residential neighborhoods, but the system would remain capable of tracking human beings in residential areas. According to the staff report:
In response to privacy concerns, CBP has stated the system would be configured to avoid scanning residential areas that fall into the scan viewshed, focusing the system on the marine environment. CBP has maintained the purpose of the system is specifically maritime surveillance, and the system would be singularly focused on offshore activities. However, there may be an instance in which there is an active smuggling event, detected by the system at sea, in which the subsequent smuggling event traverses through the residential neighborhoods. In such a case, the system may continue to track and monitor. To restrict this functionality would be contrary to the spirit and intent of the deployment. Therefore, they cannot make such a contractual obligation.
The Anduril towers retain a variety of data, including images and more.
The proposed Anduril surveillance tower. Source: City of San Clemente
“The AST capture and retain imagery which occurs in plan view of the tower sites and is stored as an individual event with a unique event identified allowing replay of the event for further investigation or dismissal based on activity occurring,” according to the private threshold analysis.
The document indicates a potential 30-day retention period for imagery, but then contradicts itself to say that data will be held indefinitely to train algorithms: “AST will also be maintaining learning training data, these records should not be deleted.” This means that taxpayers would be paying for the privilege of having their data turned into fuel for Anduril’s product.
In 2020 CBP said it would work with National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to develop a retention schedule for training data (i.e., a timeline for deletion). However, when EFF filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) with NARA, the agency said there were no records of these discussions. Likewise, CBP has not provided records in response to the FOIA request EFF filed with them seeking the same records.
Anduril Maritime Sentry in San Diego, where the border fence meets the ocean.
This would not be the first CBP tower placed along the coastline in California. EFF identified one in Del Mar, about 30 miles from the border, and another in San Diego County where the border fence meets the Pacific Ocean. CBP has also applied to place towers–although not necessarily the Anduril model–in or near several other coastal locations: Gaviota State Park, Refugio State Park, Vandenberg Air Force Base, Piedras Blancas and Point Vicente. The California coastline isn’t the only coastline dotted with surveillance towers. The Migrant Rights Network has also documented numerous Anduril towers along the southeast coast of England. Where the San Clemente tower would differ is that there is a substantial population between the tower and the beach, and because it’s a 360-degree system, it can watch neighborhoods even further from the coast.
However, this won’t be the first time an Anduril tower has been placed next to a community. EFF has documented numerous Anduril towers in public parks along the Rio Grande in Laredo and Roma, Texas. In Mission, Texas, an Anduril tower was placed outside an RV park: the tower could not even see the border without capturing data from the community. Because AI can swivel the cameras 360 degrees, two churches were within the “viewshed” of that tower.
Click here to view EFF’s ongoing map of CBP surveillance towers.
Many border surveillance towers are placed on city or county property, requiring a lease to be approved by the local governing body–as is the case with San Clemente. In 2024, EFF and Imperial Valley Equity and Justice organized an effort to fight the renewal of a Border Patrol’s lease for a tower next to a public park. The coalition lost narrowly after a recall election ousted two officials who were critical of the lease.
CBP is rapidly increasing the number of towers at the border and beyond, recently announcing the potential to install 1,500 more towers in the next few years–more than tripling what we’ve documented so far–at a cost of more than $400 million to the public for maintenance alone. This is despite more than 20 years of government reports that have documented how tower-based systems are ineffective and wasteful.
Adam Johnson is one of the left’s leading media critics. The co-host of the Citations Needed podcast, his writing has appeared in The Nation, In These Times, The Intercept, Los Angeles Times, and the San Francisco Chronicle. His new book How to Sell a Genocide: The Media’s Complicity in the Destruction of Gaza is a data-rich account of how U.S. press portrayed the destruction of Gaza as it unfolded. He uses detailed empirical analysis to expose media double standards in coverage of Palestinian and Israeli victims, and draws on interviews with insider sources at major media organizations to show how mainstream outlets deliberately censored Gaza coverage. Johnson recently joined Current Affairs editor-in-chief Nathan J. Robinson to discuss some of his findings.
The manifesto published by Palantir Technologies last week is neither a technical document nor an economic vision. It is an explicit political document announcing a new phase in the trajectory of digital capitalism, a phase in which it has abandoned its claim to neutrality and decided to unmask itself, revealing its full ideological face. Palantir is not an isolated case in the global technological landscape. It is one of several major technology companies that sell their technologies to systems of repression and human rights violations and has been condemned by international human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, for its role in enabling forced deportations, mass surveillance and the persecution of dissidents.
Most damning of all, documented reports have revealed a direct partnership between this company, alongside other Western technology companies such as Google, Amazon and Microsoft, and the Israeli military, providing data and targeting systems that were used in operations in Gaza, making it an actual partner in documented war crimes against Palestinian civilians. In this regard, it does not differ in substance from other major digital capitalist companies that practice the same thing in different forms with varying degrees of openness.
It is a class declaration of a project for a digital fascist alliance that relies not on traditional violence alone, but also on digital surveillance and repression, data analysis, artificial intelligence, the manipulation of public opinion and the suppression of dissent through imperceptible yet deeply impactful methods — an alliance whose crimes do not remain within elite circles and corporate offices, but extend to battlefields and the bodies of civilians, embodied today in its clearest form in Trumpism, its alliances, its crimes, and its aggressive wars.
From Silicon Valley to the White House: The organic alliance
To understand the Palantir manifesto outside its isolated context, we must summon the image of the alliance that has formed in recent years between a segment of the technological elite and the project of the extreme nationalist right. Peter Thiel, co-founder of Palantir and the most significant financier of President Donald Trump’s political career, is not merely a businessman supporting a political candidate.
It is a class declaration of a project for a digital fascist alliance.
He is the ideological mind that provides this project with its political logic, one who sees existing representative liberal democracy as an obstacle to the technocratic elite’s project, and who has openly declared that capitalism and traditional liberal democracy are incompatible. This alliance is no accident, and no passing intersection. It is an objective convergence between two projects that share a single goal: concentrating power in the hands of a financial and political oligarchy that believes it possesses a “natural right” to govern its own societies and others.
This alliance finds its institutional expression today in what is known as the technological acceleration movement, which includes Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg and others who have begun moving in coordinated fashion with the second Trump administration. What unites them is not complete ideological alignment. What unites them is class position and shared interest: the elimination of any regulatory or democratic constraint that limits their capacity for accumulation, domination and the expansion of control.
The 22-point manifesto: A reading of its class content
Palantir published what it described as a summary of its CEO Alexander Karp’s book “The Technological Republic” amid wide global engagement and mounting political outrage that surpassed millions of views within days. But outrage must not settle for emotional reaction alone, because the manifesto is at its core a class road map that deserves a precise leftist reading, one that goes deeper than indignation.
The manifesto contains 22 points constructed with deliberate architectural precision, not randomly. Some points appear moderate or humane on the surface, such as calls for tolerance toward politicians in their personal lives or against rejoicing at an opponent’s defeat.
These points are neither innocent nor incidental. They are the calculated facade used to win over the hesitant reader and grant the manifesto a “balanced” image before it reveals its true face. This is what ideological studies call the structure of manufactured consent. You are given a dose of reasonable-sounding language to help you swallow the toxic dose alongside it. What appears logical in the manifesto is therefore not evidence of its balance, but additional evidence of its cunning.
All these points are deployed as cover to advance a comprehensive ideological agenda that ties all these concerns to a project of militarization, domination and civilizational hierarchy. I will therefore focus on the points most revealing of the true class and ideological content of this project, while addressing the other concepts within the body of the text.
Point 1 asserts that “the engineering elite of Silicon Valley is morally obligated to participate in the defense of the nation.” This moral framing is not innocent. When military and security contracting is presented as a “moral duty,” social pressure becomes a mechanism for compelling engineers and programmers to serve the machinery of war and repression, and every dissenting voice within tech companies is silenced in the name of “patriotism.” This is the conversion of individual conscience into a commodity in service of the military and security state and its repressive and surveillance institutions.
It is a call to redirect technological capacity toward the war and surveillance machine.
Point 2 calls for “rebellion against the tyranny of apps,” meaning the rejection of consumer technology in favor of deeper security and military systems. This is not a critique of consumer capitalism as it may appear. It is a call to redirect technological capacity toward the war and surveillance machine rather than the entertainment market.
Point 5 declares that “the question is not whether AI weapons will be built; the question is who will build them.” This closed deterministic logic aims to eliminate any debate about rejecting technological militarization at its roots. When the choice is framed as “us or the enemy,” the possibility of saying “no to weapons altogether” is erased. It is the same logic used by Cold War administrations to silence peace movements and restrict leftist organizations, and here it returns in a digital guise.
Point 6 demands that “national service be a universal duty,” calling for reconsideration of the all-volunteer military in favor of mandatory conscription. This demand reveals the manifesto’s classically fascist face. When the state fails to produce voluntary willingness to participate in its wars, it resorts to institutional coercion and calls it “shared responsibility.” Most tellingly, the company demanding that young people offer their lives in defense of “the West” simultaneously earns billions of dollars from the war contracts in which those young people die. Duty for all, profits for the few.
Point 17 asserts that “Silicon Valley must play a role in addressing violent crime.” This proposal appears pragmatic on the surface, but at its core it is an expansion of the powers of private security companies to bypass the role of the state and transform into an independent force of social control, operating by the logic of profit rather than the logic of law, independent judiciary and democratic accountability.
Point 20 demands “resistance to the pervasive intolerance of religious belief.” This point does not stem from a genuine defense of freedom of belief. It is an opportunistic deployment of religious discourse to build an ideological alliance with conservative and religious currents that are most susceptible to mobilization behind war projects. History teaches us that every fascist project needed an alliance with religious institutions to lend violence a sacred character, and this is what this point seeks under the cover of “freedom of faith.”
Point 21 is the most revealing of the deep ideological dimension when it declares that “some cultures have produced vital advances while others remain dysfunctional and regressive.” This sentence is not a passing cultural opinion. It is the theoretical foundation of civilizational colonial racism that justifies domination, occupation and the killing of peoples under the cover of “rational management of civilization.”
This logic does not differ fundamentally from the “white man’s burden” that justified colonialism in previous centuries, and it is being reproduced today in the language of algorithms and big data. What makes it more dangerous than its predecessor is that it requires no visible colonial forces. A database and a targeting algorithm suffice.
Trumpism as a system, not a person
The common mistake is to reduce Trumpism to the person of Donald Trump. Trumpism is a comprehensive class project combining national financial capital with chauvinistic nationalism and hostility toward immigrants and minorities. At its core, it is an expression of the crisis of capitalism when it can no longer reproduce the liberal illusion for its audience, so it resorts to aggressive nationalist discourse to divert attention from the real class contradictions. What the Palantir manifesto does is link digital monopoly capital to this project and supply it with the technological tools needed to transform it from electoral political discourse into an actual system of control.
The documented cooperation between Palantir and immigration authorities and security agencies in tracking and deporting migrants is a practical model of this alliance. Technology here is not used to serve “security” in any neutral sense. It is used to implement repressive and racist policies with high operational efficiency. The digital tool makes repression faster, more precise and less in need of public justification.
Digital feudalism and its fascist phase
As I have previously argued in my analyses of digital capitalism, we are living through the advanced phase of digital feudalism, in which large corporations monopolize digital infrastructure and impose their conditions on users, just as feudal lords once monopolized land and controlled peasants. What the Palantir manifesto reveals is that this digital feudalism is now entering its fascist phase, the phase in which capital no longer contents itself with silent economic exploitation but moves toward explicit political and ideological mobilization and control to protect its system from any threat.
Under digital capitalism, it is no longer only traditional manual and intellectual workers who are victims of exploitation. Every user produces daily data that is converted into raw material for the production of surplus value without compensation.
Digital serfs work within systems they do not own and are subject to rules over which they have no real influence. What the manifesto adds to this picture is militarization. These same exploitative systems are now directed toward framing the human mind, waging wars, suppressing dissent, forcing deportations and managing systems of security control.
Algorithms of death
The manifesto cannot be read in isolation from what is happening in contemporary wars. Documented reports have revealed that Palantir has established strategic partnerships with armies and security institutions to build targeting databases that are actually used in military operations. This is not a theoretical possibility. It is a documented daily practice: algorithms that convert human lives into data points, and data points into military targets.
The digital tool makes repression faster, more precise and less in need of public justification.
In Palestine, journalistic and investigative reports have documented the use of artificial intelligence systems to build targeting lists that resulted in massacres against civilians in Gaza. In Venezuela, Iran and other countries that Washington classifies as “threats,” surveillance and data systems are used to support militarism, aggression and wars that violate international law.
What the company calls a “smart targeting system” is in practice a machine for managing killing with industrial efficiency. Killing no longer requires a responsible human decision. It requires an algorithm, sufficient data and a green light from an apparatus that is subject to no democratic accountability. This is the field application of what the manifesto calls “real-time decision-making capacity,” where kill decisions are made instantaneously within closed technical systems.
Most importantly in this context, the use of these systems cannot be separated from the discourse that justifies classifying entire communities as backward or threatening. The crime does not begin with the bomb. It begins with the classification. When entire communities are defined as a threat, the killing and targeting of civilians becomes “security management” rather than a crime whose perpetrators must be held accountable.
The illusion of technological neutrality, self-surveillance and digital repression as tools of control
The danger of the model Palantir is building does not lie solely in its direct military applications. More dangerous still is what can be described as the “surveillance society,” when control becomes internal rather than external. When an individual knows they are being watched at every moment and feels that every digital interaction is being recorded and analyzed, they begin to impose surveillance on themselves.
They modify their speech, avoid sensitive subjects, distance themselves from radical dissenting ideas. This voluntary self-surveillance restricts and weakens leftist and progressive movements and labor organizations from within, without the need for arrests or direct restrictions.
The manifesto’s call for “deep understanding of human behavior” as a condition for security is in reality a call to build a comprehensive system for disrupting collective political action before it emerges. Predicting protest behavior and dismantling it before it becomes an organized movement is the dream that security services have long pursued, and Palantir’s technology is moving closer to realizing it.
Among the most prominent ideological mechanisms of the manifesto is its reliance on closed deterministic logic. “There will be no technological neutrality,” “the question is not whether AI weapons will be built,” “democracies cannot rely on moral discourse alone.” This approach aims to convert political choices into inescapable natural facts and to eliminate any questioning of the nature of the existing system from the sphere of legitimate debate. It is the same approach used by neoliberals when they declared in the 1990s that “capitalism is the end of history.” Now the same logic returns in a security formulation: There is no choice but digital militarization.
This determinism is not a neutral description of reality. It is a tactic for emptying politics of its content. When you are convinced there is no alternative, you stop searching for one. And that is the primary goal behind this language.
The leftist alternative: The question of ownership and collective control
The Palantir manifesto is not merely a document from a tech company announcing its positions. It is also a loud alarm bell that progressive forces must hear clearly. The battle over the future of technology is no longer lurking backstage. It has stepped into the open, announcing itself without shame. Those who delay in grasping this shift delay their entry into the most decisive arena of struggle in this century.
The battle over the future of technology is no longer lurking backstage.
The fundamental question is not how technology is used. It is who owns it and who determines its objectives. Technology will not become a tool of liberation as long as it remains in the hands of digital monopolies allied with projects of the right, war and repression. Any serious discussion must begin from the necessity of collective societal ownership of digital infrastructure, and from subjecting algorithms and artificial intelligence to genuine democratic oversight that represents the interests of working masses rather than monopolistic elites.
This requires leftist, progressive and human rights forces to engage with the arena of technology in full seriousness as an important field of class struggle. Producing intellectual critique, however important, is not enough without building actual technological alternatives through coordination and joint work via digital internationals: social platforms free from monopoly, restriction and repression; search tools that respect the privacy of all users; artificial intelligence systems managed in a democratic and transparent manner; and other digital applications. These are not recreational projects for the future. They are an urgent strategic necessity for any serious liberatory project.
Necessary addition: Technological disarmament as a prerequisite
Building alternatives alone is not sufficient unless paired with an organized campaign to strip these monopolies of their technological weapons. It should be noted here that Palantir is not an exceptional case or an anomaly in the technological landscape. It is the most explicit and bold expression of what many other companies practice with greater silence and softer discourse. What makes it a point of focus in this analysis is that it revealed what others are accustomed to concealing, not that it differs from them in substance. The system is one; the only exception is the degree of frankness.
Just as the historical labor movements struggled to disarm capital in factories and farms, today an equivalent struggle is necessary to wrest lethal algorithms, targeting systems and mass surveillance from the grip of these companies collectively.
This struggle takes multiple forms: boycotting their services, exposing their secret contracts with governments, prosecuting their executives before international courts on charges of complicity in war crimes and pressuring public institutions to sever their relationships with these companies. Every government contract with this system is direct financing of the killing and deportation machine. Stopping this financial flow is the first line of confrontation.
This path cannot be completed without working simultaneously at both the domestic legislative and international levels. At the domestic level, pressure must be applied to enact strict laws requiring security technology companies to maintain full transparency in their contracts with governments, criminalizing the use of artificial intelligence systems in military targeting outside any independent judicial oversight and compelling these companies to submit to the same accountability standards to which public institutions are subject.
At the international level, work must be done to subject these companies to international human rights conventions, particularly the Geneva Conventions prohibiting the indiscriminate targeting of civilians, the United Nations charter on the protection of personal data and the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. A company that builds targeting databases in war zones cannot be permitted to operate outside this legal framework, and if it does, the governments that contract with it bear shared criminal responsibility. This is not a luxury reformist demand. It is the minimum required by the humanity of law in confrontation with the inhumanity of the algorithm.
Second addition: Exposing the labor silence at the heart of the manifesto
What is striking in the Palantir manifesto, indeed what is deeply suspicious, is that it does not mention a single word about workers, about unions, about the right to organize, about the right to strike. In a document that speaks of the “engineering elite,” “moral duty” and “backward cultures,” there is no place for the manual and intellectual workers who build these algorithms, operate them and live under the weight of the same surveillance.
There is no place for the manual and intellectual workers who build these algorithms.
This silence is not incidental. It is an implicit admission that the fascist technological project cannot face the workers’ question, because workers alone, if they organize themselves, are capable of stopping the lines of death production entirely. A general strike in Silicon Valley, or even in Palantir’s own offices, is this project’s nightmare. Supporting technology workers’ unions and linking their struggle to a global struggle is therefore an act of resistance of the first order.
This technological struggle cannot be separated from the popular struggle on the ground. Technology is a supporting tool for the struggle, not a substitute for it. Real power remains in political, labor and popular organization, in social movements, in international solidarity among the toiling masses of this system, whether in wars, at borders or in workers’ neighborhoods surveilled by algorithms that require no one’s permission.
Conclusion: Digital fascism by its true name
The Palantir manifesto reveals clearly that we face a new form of fascism, not only in the narrow historical sense, but in its essential meaning: the alliance of monopoly capital with aggressive national political power and the deployment of violence, repression and civilizational hierarchy to protect this alliance from any popular threat. The only difference is that the tools of this fascism today are algorithms, big data and artificial intelligence, and this is what makes it more airtight and more difficult to resist than what preceded it.
When Alexander Karp finishes writing his philosophical manifesto in his elegant office, the algorithms his company built continue their work of identifying targets, tracking migrants at borders, building databases of dissidents around the world and supporting the machinery of militarism and repression across the globe. Philosophy and crime are two faces of the same coin.
The struggle for social justice and liberation today passes inevitably and substantially through the struggle to liberate technology from this aggressive class alliance. This is not a technical question or an abstract ethical question. It is a political question through and through, and part of a historical struggle over who holds control over the future and human consciousness: the monopolistic minority allied with projects of killing and repression, or the working masses who must impose their authority over the tools that shape their lives and their destiny.
Karp, Alexander C. and Zamiska, Nicholas W. — The Technological Republic: Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West. Crown Currency, New York, 2025. https://techrepublicbook.com/
Second: Journalistic Reports and Analyses on the Manifesto
military contractor Palantir is helping the IRS analyze dozens of different data sets on Americans to investigate a broad range of financial crimes, according to records shared with The Intercept.
Since 2018, the Internal Revenue Service’s Criminal Investigation division has used Palantir’s Lead and Case Analytics platform to aggregate and analyze a sprawling list of sensitive federal databases and data sets.
Public records detailing Palantir’s IRS contract, obtained by the nonprofit watchdog group American Oversight and shared exclusively with The Intercept, reveal the immense volume of data plugged into the military contractor’s software. The LCA uses both Palantir’s Gotham and Foundry applications to facilitate “analysis of massive-scale data to find the needle in the hay stack,” the contract paperwork says.
Documents indicate the IRS has paid Palantir over $130 million for these services to date.
Palantir’s LCA is ostensibly directed toward cracking down on fraud, money laundering, and other financial crimes. According to a 2024 agency privacy impact assessment, IRS “Special agents and investigative analysts … utilize the platform to find, analyze, and visualize connections between disparate sets of data to generate leads, identify schemes, uncover tax fraud, and conduct money laundering and forfeiture investigative activities.”
The IRS use of the software, launched under Trump’s first term and expanded under Biden, is now in the hands of an IRS Criminal Investigations office that has drastically scaled back its pursuit of tax cheats and pivoted, under Trump’s direction, toward investigating “left-leaning groups,” the Wall Street Journal reported in October.
“The real concern is the consolidation of vast amounts of sensitive personal data into a single system with minimal transparency — especially one built and operated by a contractor like Palantir, whose business model is premised on integrating data and expanding surveillance capabilities,” American Oversight director Chioma Chukwu said in a statement to The Intercept. “Its platforms have been used in deeply troubling contexts, from immigration enforcement to predictive policing, with persistent concerns about overreach, bias, and weak oversight.”
Palantir did not respond to a request for comment, nor did the IRS.
“The real concern is the consolidation of vast amounts of sensitive personal data into a single system with minimal transparency — especially one built and operated by a contractor like Palantir.”
The contract documents reviewed by The Intercept reveal that these “disparate sets of data” are vast. Palantir’s LCA allows the IRS to quickly search and visualize “connections from millions of records with thousands of links” between databases maintained by the IRS and other federal agencies. According to the contract documents, this data includes individual tax form and tax returns as well as Affordable Care Act data, bank statements, and transactions, and “all available” data compiled by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
Its view apparently extends to cryptocurrencies including bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, and Ripple. “The application would sit on top of a singular repository of identified wallets from seized servers utilizing dark web data obtained from exchangers such as Coinbase,” the documents note.
The program places an emphasis on mapping social relationships between the targets of an investigation. That includes analyzing a “network of people and the relationships and communications between them,” such as “calls, texts, [and] emails events.” The use of “IP address analysis” within LCA allows the IRS to “Identify suspects more easily” and “Establish (new) relationships among actors.”
These investigative functions are continuously updated, the materials say, through ongoing close work between Palantir engineers and IRS personnel.
The intermingling of sensitive data on millions of Americans comes at a time of increased global skepticism and opposition toward Palantir, which, despite its military-intelligence origins, has a thriving business with civilian agencies like the IRS. The use of Palantir software at the U.K.’s National Health Service, for example, has created an ongoing political controversy across Britain, while a similar contract with the New York City public hospital network was recently canceled following public protest.
The contract is also active at a time when IRS Criminal Investigations has been coopted to aid in the broader Trump administration’s aggressive agenda. In July, ProPublica reported that the agency was working with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to provide “on demand” data to accelerate deportations. Last year, the New York Times reported that Palantir, founded by Trump ally Peter Thiel, was central to an administration effort to increase data-sharing across federal agencies.
“The question isn’t just what it can do — it’s who it will be used against.”
The company’s right-wing politics and eagerness to facilitate U.S. and Israeli military aggression abroad, NSA global surveillance, and ICE deportations has also made many weary of its access to incredibly sensitive personal data. A recent post on the company’s Palantir’s X account summarizing a book by CEO Alex Karp triggered an immediate backlash from those unnerved by the manifesto’s fascistic bent. The bullet points extolled the virtue of arms manufacturing, argued the Axis powers were unfairly punished after World War II, called for a reinstatement of the draft, condemned cultural pluralism, and claimed that wealthy elites are unfairly persecuted.
“When the government can map relationships, track behavior, and generate investigative leads across data sets at this scale, the question isn’t just what it can do — it’s who it will be used against,” Chukwu said. “Entrusting that infrastructure to a company known for opaque, security-state deployments only heightens those risks.”
Transparency advocates and opposition lawmakers are demanding an independent investigation after cybercriminals infiltrated Sri Lanka’s national treasury and diverted millions of dollars intended to repay a foreign debt.
The theft, which the local chapter of Transparency International condemned on Friday as “a serious lapse of financial oversight,” underscores severe digital vulnerabilities in the island nation’s government.
The Ministry of Finance confirmed earlier this week that hackers successfully breached the email system of the treasury’s Public Debt Management Office and tricked the government into wiring funds to their accounts.
The scam was identified only after Australian export finance agencies notified Sri Lankan officials that the money, which was transmitted in five installments between Dec. 31, 2025, and March 20, 2026, had never arrived.
“Although the government followed the required procedures and completed the payment, the intended recipient did not receive the money,” Treasury Secretary Harshana Suriyapperuma told journalists. “Instead, the criminals who intervened in the email communications were able to divert nearly $2.5 million into other accounts.”
The revelation has ignited a political backlash, with opposition leaders accusing the government of concealing the breach from the legislature and evading accountability.
“In over 15 years in Parliament, I have never seen this level of contempt for parliamentary oversight,” Harsha de Silva, a member of the opposition Samagi Jana Balawegaya coalition and head of the parliamentary Committee on Public Finance, wrote on the social platform X. “Parliament is constitutionally responsible for public finance.”
Suriyapperuma defended the decision to withhold the information from lawmakers, arguing that premature public disclosure would have jeopardized an ongoing criminal probe.
While he declined to specify where the stolen funds were routed, the treasury secretary confirmed that several finance officials have been suspended pending the outcome of the investigation.
Bellingcat has identified at least 80 police stations or infrastructure related to law enforcement agencies and the Basij paramilitary group that has been damaged or destroyed in the first three weeks of the United States and Israel’s war against Iran. Experts told Bellingcat that bothcountries aim to degrade the Iranian regime’s “repressive capacity”.
Combined, the US and Israel have conductedthousands of strikes during the course of the 2026 war in Iran. Targets range from Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) sites, Navy vessels to Iranian weapons manufacturers.
In early March, a Bellingcat analysis using satellite imagery and available photos and videos identified police stations as another apparent target, with at least 15 damaged or destroyed in the capital, Tehran.
We also identified multiple strikes against police infrastructure in the country’s north and west; these areas were targeted by the Israel Defence Forces according to a map released by the IDF on March 31.
“We are providing the brave people of Iran with the conditions to take their destiny into their own hands,” declared the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs official X account, along with a photo of a destroyed police station.
اینجا کلانتری ۱۲۱ سلیمانیه در خیابان نبرد تهران بود.
ما شرایطی را برای مردم شجاع ایران فراهم میکنیم تا سرنوشت خود را در دست بگیرند. pic.twitter.com/VSm6YVvIwZ
In all, the majority of strikes Bellingcat analysed focused on police stations (30 incidents) and command centers or headquarters (29 incidents). Locations also include sites related to Basij, a plainclothes paramilitary organisation (9) affiliated with the IRGC that were “involved in the deadly crackdown” of protests in January 2026, others are associated with special forces (3) and traffic (2) or diplomatic (2) police compounds.
Due to commercial satellite companies limiting access to imagery over Iran and neighbouring countries we relied on Sentinel-2 imagery data to help verify the incidents, as well as videos and photos, some of which were also verified by independent geolocators and contributors to the Geoconfirmed volunteer community and confirmed by Bellingcat researchers.
Location data was partly determined using open source mapping data either from Wikimapia, OpenStreetMap or Google Maps. When video footage or photos were available for incidents reportedly targeting police stations, the location was verified with geolocation and satellite imagery analysis using either Planet Labs medium resolution PlanetScope data (restricted to imagery collected by March 9) or low resolution Sentinel-2 data.
Some locations were discovered utilising location data taken from OpenStreetMap using Overpass Turbo and comparing that with available Sentinel-2 data throughout Iran.
Map showing geolocated incidents in Iran. Click the markers to view the coordinates, sources, and verification notes. Map: Bellingcat/Miguel Ramalho
A Problem of Scale
Israel has released multiplevideos showing the targeting of bases and checkpoints belonging to the Basij. In mid-March, the IDF announced the killing of the paramilitary group’s commander, Gholamreza Soleimani.
Targeting the Basij is part of Israel’s and the US’ agenda “to degrade the regime’s repressive capacity,” Ali Vaez, the director of International Crisis Group Iran Project, told Bellingcat. Police stations are “not involved in repression in the way that crowd control police or Basij centers are”, so targeting them “appears more aimed at preventing the Islamic Republic from being able to maintain control internally,” he said.
Support Bellingcat
Your donations directly contribute to our ability to publish groundbreaking investigations and uncover wrongdoing around the world.
Vaez told Bellingcat that, when considered alongside the broader range of targets, including industrial factories, the widespread targeting of police stations is part of a strategy “to make Iran ungovernable for the existing regime or whatever comes after”.
Vaez was skeptical about the short term effects: “It’s a problem of scale. Iran is such a large country, even if you are able to completely destroy, not just degrade, the capacity of the regime in policing, oppressing, etc – it really requires not just maybe weeks but maybe months if not years.”
The Risk of Civilian Casualties
As of April 7, the Iranian Human Rights Activists News Agency estimates there’ve been more than 1,700 civilian fatalities during the war.
Several police stations are situated in densely populated urban areas such as Tehran. Stations are used by civilians for various reasons including renewing driving licences, so if these buildings are targeted “during working hours and not in the middle of the night then risk is higher for these people,” Vaez said.
Map showing geolocated incidents in Tehran. Click the markers to view the coordinates, sources, and verification notes.Map: Bellingcat/Miguel Ramalho
A recent joint Airwars, Center for Civilians in Conflict and Human Rights Activists in Iran report detailing the first month of civilian casualties included a section on the worsening situation for detainees in Iranian prisons — including police stations that have been targeted.
“I was detained in the holding cell of [Police Station 148] for ten days, along with four other activists. Now it looks like nothing is left of that station but ruins. I can’t even recognize where the detention area was. I keep wondering what happened to the people who were being held there during the attack. – Activist, told HRA upon seeing photos of the police station after recent US/Israeli airstrikes.”
Footage shared and geolocated by the BBC’s Shayan Sardarizadeh showed Police Station 148 damaged after an apparent strike in mid-March.
The main building of Tehran’s 148 police station and its courtyard, located on Enghelab Street, has been severely damaged in air strikes conducted on Friday.
The adjacent Hamoon Theatre also sustained some damage.
One destroyed police station identified by Bellingcat in the city of Mahabad in northeastern Iran led to apparent damage to an Iranian Red Crescent Society building located next door. According to Iran’s Tasnim News agency (an IRGC-affiliated media outlet sanctioned by the EU, the US and Canada), one Red Crescent employee was injured in the attack.
The police station adjacent to the Red Crescent building isn’t identified on any mapping services, though there are reports “Police Station 11” was targeted the same day.
Annotated Google Earth image showing the location of a destroyed police station and partially destroyed Red Crescent building in Mahabad, West Azerbaijan Province, Iran. A video shared on Telegram by mamlekate on March 6 shows the view of the destruction from the ground. Buildings behind the destroyed police station match with those seen in the Google Earth imagery.
Israel has also targeted checkpoints operated by Basij members.
Bellingcat examined two cases showing Israeli strikes on checkpoints while civilians were passing. In one video, a strike hits a checkpoint as five motorbikes and a vehicle go by.
View of a Basij checkpoint in Tehran targeted by the IDF. Immediately before the explosion is visible in the video, there are five motorbikes and a car next to the checkpoint. Source: YouTube/IDF
In another IDF video, a yellow bus is immediately adjacent to the checkpoint when it is hit. It is unclear how many people were on the bus at the time of the strike or if anyone was injured.
View of a Basij checkpoint in Tehran targeted by the IDF. Immediately before the explosion, there is a yellow bus visible next to the targeted checkpoint. Source: IDF
“I have been watching the reporting on these Basij strikes and the use of the Mikholit in particular in open urban areas. It is IDF standard—using precision munitions and even sometimes “low collateral” munitions but in a reckless manner that still puts the civilian population at risk,” Wes J. Bryant, a defence and national security analyst formerly with the Pentagon’s Civilian Protection Center of Excellence told Bellingcat.
Questions Over Legality
International Humanitarian Lawdefines civilians as “persons who are not members of the armed forces”. Police officers fall under that definition, according to Adil Haque, Professor of Law at Rutgers University and Executive Editor at Just Security. “As a rule, police are civilians and may not be attacked unless they take a direct part in hostilities,” Haque told Bellingcat. National security analyst Bryant agreed, adding that targeting police “does not stand up to legal scrutiny”.
Subscribe to the Bellingcat newsletter
Subscribe to our newsletter for first access to our published content and events that our staff and contributors are involved with, including interviews and training workshops.
In an email to Bellingcat, the IDF noted “that the police form part of Iran’s internal security apparatus, which also forms part of Iran’s armed forces, under Iran’s own domestic legislation. In every strike, the IDF takes feasible precautions in order to mitigate incidental harm to civilians and civilian objects to the extent possible under the circumstances.”
Police are indeed “part of the country’s armed forces. By that logic, anything with a flag on it is a legitimate target,” Ali Vaez, the director of International Crisis Group Iran Project, said.
Although Basij is a paramilitary group, any strikes against it would require precautions to minimise harm to civilians, Haque told Bellingcat. “Since the hostilities almost entirely involve aerial bombardment, the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from strikes on Basij members who qualify as combatants is extremely low, so significant harm to nearby civilians would be disproportionate and illegal,” he said.
When asked about potential civilian casualties in the checkpoint strikes, the IDF told Bellingcat that since the Basij are subordinate to the IRGC and are therefore part of the armed forces, they are regarded as lawful military targets. Regarding the checkpoint strikes specifically, they stated “precision munitions and surveillance means were used in the strikes, as part of the precautions taken under the circumstances to mitigate expected incidental harm”.
Bellingcat reached out to US Central Command (CENTCOM) to ask if the US had any role in the police station strikes identified but received no official comment at the time of publication.
Miguel Ramalho and Felix Matteo Lommerse contributed to this report.
Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Patreon channel here. Subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.
Launched in 2015, Zoowoman was a popular Spanish non-commercial film repository.
The site did not store any movies, but it hosted links to approximately 11,000 titles before it was shut down.
The site was purportedly operated by a group of people, including film enthusiast “El Feo,” who is also the creator of La Filmoteca Maldita, a YouTube channel with over 400,000 subscribers dedicated to film analysis and criticism.
El Feo told TorrentFreak that the site focused specifically on films that were out of circulation commercially, discontinued, or otherwise difficult to access through normal channels. As such, the project was recognized for its uniqueness and reportedly used as a teaching resource by several universities across Spain and Latin America.
However, despite their educational value, the films were not necessarily in the public domain, and many were protected by active copyrights. As a result, Zoowoman eventually attracted attention from rightsholders. And while the site specifically asked “creativity vampires” to leave it alone, that didn’t last.
Zoowoman Raid and Prosecution
In 2021, El Feo’s home was raided, with the authorities taking over the Zoowoman WordPress admin account using credentials recovered from his phone. The police locked the admin out of the site and blocked public access to the archive while leaving the hosting account untouched.
The enforcement action eventually led to a lawsuit backed by EGEDA, the Spanish audiovisual rights management headed by Enrique Cerezo, who is a film producer and president of the football club Atlético de Madrid. Through court, EGEDA requested two and a half years in prison and damages of €870,000.
The action against Zoowoman coincided with the launch of FlixOlé, a subscription streaming platform for classic Spanish cinema also backed by Cerezo, which served an overlapping audience.
Zoowoman in 2020 (translated)
After several years, the Zoowoman case went to trial earlier this month, where the prosecution presented evidence that the defendant generated approximately €12,000 in streaming income from YouTube, Patreon, and PayPal over four years. While this revenue wasn’t generated from the Zoowoman website, the prosecution argued that the defendant profited from the overall ecosystem.
The prosecution also argued that the film archive facilitated widespread copyright infringement, which also affected EGEDA as a collective rights management outfit.
“El Feo” Fights Back
Speaking with TorrentFreak, El Feo noted that the €12,000 in revenue cited by the prosecution is completely unrelated to the defunct film archive. In fact, the defense argued that he had stepped back from the project in late 2019, roughly two years before his arrest, because his YouTube work had become too demanding.
Nonetheless, the police investigation highlighted him as the sole and main defendant. According to El Feo, the other WordPress admins were reclassified as regular users by the investigators, effectively reducing the case to a single defendant.
“They came in, converted the rest of the admins into users, to focus the investigation on me. Better to have one defendant than 15,” El Feo told us (translated from Spanish), while stressing that he is glad that the other people who were involved in Zoowoman did not get in trouble.
Critically, El Feo also noted that the police failed to preserve the site’s server logs. As a result, there was no record of which administrators were accessing the site or from which IP addresses. According to El Feo, this means that he wasn’t able to mount a proper defense.
El Feo released a video on his case on the La filmoteca maldita YouTube channel earlier this month, after the trial was completed. At the time of writing, however, the verdict has yet to be released.
The verdict is expected to be released soon. The outcome is likely to be watched closely by digital preservation communities across Spain and Latin America, where Zoowoman built a dedicated following among cinephiles and academics.
From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.
In a significant escalation of its economic campaign against Moscow, the European Union adopted its 20th package of sanctions late Thursday, crossing a new geopolitical threshold by imposing direct, country-level restrictions against Kyrgyzstan for the first time.
The new measures ban the export of computer numerical control (C.N.C.) machines and radio equipment to the Central Asian nation. European officials justified the unprecedented step by citing trade data that revealed a surging re-export market for high-priority technologies. The bloc warned of a “high risk” that these goods are being covertly funneled to Russia and utilized to manufacture missiles and drones for the war in Ukraine.
Prior to Thursday’s sweeping decision, the EU had limited its actions in Kyrgyzstan to targeted sanctions against individual companies and banks. In an appendix outlining the new measures, the European Union stated that despite extensive negotiations and consultations with authorities in Bishkek, the Kyrgyz government had failed to take sufficient action to stem the flow of restricted goods.
Kyrgyz authorities did not immediately comment on the EU embargo. However, on the same day the measures were announced, Kyrgyz President Sadyr Japarov unexpectedly traveled to Moscow for a meeting with President Vladimir V. Putin.
The Kremlin’s press service framed the abrupt trip as a comprehensive bilateral engagement but did not specify the agenda.
“President Japarov will be in Moscow on a short working visit,” the official statement read. “The presidents will hold a separate meeting and continue it over a working lunch. We expect a full and lengthy meeting between the heads of state.”
Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin spokesman, defended the transshipment of goods through Central Asia, arguing that the European sanctions penalized Kyrgyzstan merely for pursuing its economic autonomy. The cooperation between Russia and Kyrgyzstan “was not due to loyalty to Russia, but due to loyalty to its own interests,” Peskov said, adding that the mutually beneficial economic relationship justified the diplomatic risks.
The European embargo is the latest blow in a mounting Western pressure campaign against Kyrgyzstan, which allied nations increasingly view as a critical loophole in the financial and technological blockade of Russia.
Just a day earlier, a cross-party group of British lawmakers urged the U.K. government to sanction three top Kyrgyz officials. The lawmakers accused them of allowing a ruble-pegged cryptocurrency, A7A5, to operate within its borders, effectively providing Russian entities a backdoor to international currency markets.
The broader economic squeeze on Bishkek has been tightening for months. In October 2025, the EU blacklisted two Kyrgyz banks and the Grinex cryptocurrency exchange, identifying them as financial institutions supplying payment services and crypto assets to Russia. That same year, the United Kingdom levied sanctions against twoother state-affiliated Kyrgyz banks.
Solomon Islands has appointed a new national police chief, elevating a top commander just weeks after it was revealed that prosecutors had recommended charging him for improperly destroying seized methamphetamine.
Ian Vaevaso was officially sworn in as commissioner of the Royal Solomon Islands Police Force on Friday. The appointment unfolded against the backdrop of a separate political crisis threatening to topple the government of Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele, furthering political divisions in the Pacific nation.
Vaevaso, formerly a deputy commissioner, has denied wrongdoing regarding an episode in early 2024 when he allegedly broke protocol by ordering subordinates to hand over confiscated methamphetamine, which he then dumped into the sea. An internal police investigation found evidence that he had improperly destroyed the drugs, intimidated dissenting officers, and lied to investigators.
The police force defended its new chief, dismissing the allegations as “misleading and fabricated” and characterizing them as part of an “ongoing propaganda campaign” aimed at fracturing the department. Vaevaso could not be reached for comment.
The swearing-in occurred less than a month after a joint investigation by OCCRP and our local member center In-depth Solomons reported that the case against Vaevaso had been derailed by a bureaucratic standoff.
According to an internal memo from the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Andrew Kelesi, obtained by In-depth Solomons, legal staff concluded there was “sufficient evidence to establish the criminal offence of abuse of office” and recommended that Vaevaso be suspended and criminally charged. Kelesi subsequently issued a confidential report recommending that Vaevaso be formally interviewed before a final charging decision was made. The prosecutor told reporters he had also advised suspending the commander.
Yet Vaevaso was never interviewed, suspended, or charged. The case stalled amid an impasse between the prosecutor, the police department, and a police oversight commission.
The decision to instead promote him to lead the 3,000-officer force drew immediate condemnation. Matthew Wale, the opposition leader in Parliament, called the appointment a “gross failure of judgment” that severely undermined public trust and accountability.
Wale noted that the Attorney General’s Office had recently dismissed the evidence against Vaevaso as insufficient and recommended closing the file, clearing the commander’s path to the top job. The Attorney General’s Office could not be immediately reached for comment regarding the status of the case.
“No one under active investigation should be elevated to the top of law enforcement until the truth is fully established,” Wale said in a statement.
Transparency advocates echoed those concerns, pointing to a breakdown in institutional safeguards. Ruth Liloqula, the head of Transparency Solomon Islands, questioned the integrity of the vetting process that allowed Vaevaso to remain eligible for the role.
“If the D.P.P. and R.S.I.P.F. offices had evidence, he should have been charged last year,” Liloqula said. “Now, he’s in charge.”
The leadership controversy arrives at a perilous moment for law enforcement in the Pacific, which is experiencing a steep increase in transnational drug trafficking. Small island states like the Solomons have increasingly become transit hubs for narcotics bound for lucrative shores in Australia and New Zealand.
The influx of cheap methamphetamine has also begun driving a domestic addiction crisis in several Pacific island countries. Highlighting the scale and sophistication of the illicit trade, at least seven so-called narco-submarines have reportedly been discovered in the region over the past two years — four of them in the Solomon Islands.
A free, open visual identity for enshittification (permalink)
To my surprise, my life’s work has turned out to be a long series of attempts to get people to engage with the abstract, distant issues of tech policy before it’s too late. This is hard, because people naturally devote their attention to things that are concrete and immediate (for very good reasons!).
For nearly 25 years, I’ve worked with my comrades at the Electronic Frontier Foundation to raise the salience of these abstract, technical ideas. I’ve come up with metaphors, parables, framing devices, narratives, and then…a dirty little word: enshittification. It turned out that this word, and the minor license to vulgarity it confers, was the secret to unleashing a tide of interest in these issues, to my immense surprise and gratification.
But I don’t confine my efforts to coming up with words to engage people on these matters. For several years now, I have been developing myself as a collagist, combining public domain images with Creative Commons-licensed materials to create several collages every week that aim to illustrate these abstract, technical issues in an engaging, visual way:
This got a lot easier with the 2025 publication of my international bestseller Enshittification, and not just because a lot of people read that book. It was also because the US edition, from MCD/Farrar, Straus and Giroux had a gorgeous cover:
That cover featured a (literally and figuratively) iconic variation of the “pile of poo” emoji, with angry eyebrows and a grawlix-scrawled black censor’s bar over its mouth. It was designed by the brilliant Devin Washburn of No Ideas studio:
Devin’s poop emoji became my go-to visual shorthand for illustrating stories about enshittification, an instantly recognizable way to identify my subject matter:
I liked it so much I ordered a couple hundred enamel pins and a couple thousand vinyl stickers featuring the design, and handed them out for free to people I met on my 33-city book tour. Everywhere I went – and every time a video went out showing me wearing the pin – I was inundated with requests to buy this stuff. But my pins and stickers weren’t merch (stuff you could buy) – they were swag (stuff I gave away). I had no interest in getting into the merch business!
But you folks kept asking, and also, I really loved that design, so I offered Devin a cash buyout for the rights to his enshittification poop emoji and then I released it under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license that lets you use it any way you want, including for commercial products, provided you attribute it and link back to the original:
With all proceeds going to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the most profound and powerful disenshittifying force on the planet Earth!
But because this is CC licensed, you can make your own merch and swag! I made this great print-on-demand lawn flag my for front garden so I could let my enshittification flag fly:
My goal here is to create a free, open, remixable visual language for talking about platform decay, not owned by me or anyone, a part of the commons. Use it to illustrate anything you want, especially if you want to analogize enshittification to other phenomena, like politics or other non-digital phenomena. Semantic drift is good, actually!
You can get the high-rez of Devin’s enshittification poop emoji from the internet’s three most important repositories of Creative Commons licensed work.
I’ve supported Creative Commons literally since the very beginning. I worked with Larry Lessig, Aaron Swartz, Matt Haughey and Lisa Rein on the launch of the original licenses in 2002/3, and my first novel, Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom was the first book released under a CC license:
Creative Commons is one of the most amazing feats of stunt-lawyering ever attempted, and it has been an unmitigated success, with tens of billions of works licensed CC, including all of Wikipedia. Like EFF, CC is a charitable nonprofit that depends on individual donors to keep its work going. The org turned 25 this year (along with my career as a novelist), and they’ve launched a giant fundraiser to carry their work forward.
As my contribution to the fundraiser, I’ve provided them with 375 signed, numbered copies of Canny Valley, my (otherwise) not-for-sale, extremely limited edition book of my collages, with an intro by Bruce Sterling. The book was designed by type legend John D Berry and printed at Pasadena’s Typeworks, a century-old, family-owned print shop, on 100lb Mohawk paper, with a PVC binding that will last for generations:
CC tells me there’s still some copies of Canny Valley left in the fundraiser. If you’re intrigued by my collaging and want to own this very strange and beautiful little artifact, here’s where to go:
“Red Team Blues”: “A grabby, compulsive thriller that will leave you knowing more about how the world works than you did before.” Tor Books http://redteamblues.com.
“Chokepoint Capitalism: How to Beat Big Tech, Tame Big Content, and Get Artists Paid, with Rebecca Giblin”, on how to unrig the markets for creative labor, Beacon Press/Scribe 2022 https://chokepointcapitalism.com
Currently writing: “The Post-American Internet,” a sequel to “Enshittification,” about the better world the rest of us get to have now that Trump has torched America. Third draft completed. Submitted to editor.
“The Reverse Centaur’s Guide to AI,” a short book for Farrar, Straus and Giroux about being an effective AI critic. LEGAL REVIEW AND COPYEDIT COMPLETE.
“The Post-American Internet,” a short book about internet policy in the age of Trumpism. PLANNING.
A Little Brother short story about DIY insulin PLANNING
This work – excluding any serialized fiction – is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. That means you can use it any way you like, including commercially, provided that you attribute it to me, Cory Doctorow, and include a link to pluralistic.net.
Quotations and images are not included in this license; they are included either under a limitation or exception to copyright, or on the basis of a separate license. Please exercise caution.
“When life gives you SARS, you make sarsaparilla” -Joey “Accordion Guy” DeVilla
READ CAREFULLY: By reading this, you agree, on behalf of your employer, to release me from all obligations and waivers arising from any and all NON-NEGOTIATED agreements, licenses, terms-of-service, shrinkwrap, clickwrap, browsewrap, confidentiality, non-disclosure, non-compete and acceptable use policies (“BOGUS AGREEMENTS”) that I have entered into with your employer, its partners, licensors, agents and assigns, in perpetuity, without prejudice to my ongoing rights and privileges. You further represent that you have the authority to release me from any BOGUS AGREEMENTS on behalf of your employer.
