Category: Business

  • MIL-Evening Report: We all have kangaroos hopping around our coin purse – and they’ve been on money since 1795

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Dyer, Associate Professor, Department of Physiology, Monash University

    The one tonne gold kangaroo coin at the Perth Mint. Shutterstock

    On the Australian one dollar coin, you will often find the famous representation of a mob of five kangaroos. But when did the kangaroo first appear on money?

    My new research, published in the Australian Coin Review, tracks through history the iconic representation of kangaroos on numismatic items: coins, tokens, paper notes and other objects that can act as money to enable the effective trade of goods.

    It turns out that the first representation of a kangaroo on money was not in Australia, but actually in England in 1795.

    ‘The kanguroo’

    In 1795, Thomas Hall of City Road near Finsbury Square in London – a well known taxidermist and exhibitor of exotic animals – issued half penny tokens depicting three exotic animals: a kangaroo (spelt “The Kanguroo”), an armadillo, and a rhinoceros.

    A tradeable token issued in London 1795 shows the first representation of a kangaroo (spelt ‘The Kanguroo’) on a numismatic item.
    Author provided: photo AG Dyer, CC BY

    Trade tokens were used in the late 18th century in England (and also much of the 19th century in Australia and New Zealand) due to insufficient supplies of official coinage for small-scale transactions.

    The depiction on Hall’s 1795 token was inspired by the painting The Kongouro from New Holland (1772) by the English painter George Stubbs.

    The oil painting by George Stubbs in 1772 titled The Kongouro from New Holland.
    Wikimedia Commons

    Stubbs had been commissioned by the famous naturalist Sir Joseph Banks, based on an inflated skin of a kangaroo Banks had collected from the east coast of Australia during 1770. His sister, Sarah Sophia Banks, was an important collector of English tokens and ultimately bequeathed her entire collection of tokens to the British Museum.

    The representation of a kangaroo with its head turned backwards looking over the shoulder on the Stubbs painting and the 1795 token is anatomically possible, but a less frequent depiction compared to a forward facing kangaroo common on modern coins.

    Nevertheless, one kangaroo on our current dollar appears to hold a similar pose.

    The classic mob of kangaroo design by Stuart Devlin, and the new obverse effigy of King Charles III by Daniel Thorne on the new Australian one dollar coins.
    Author provided: photo AG Dyer, CC BY

    The Banks link

    A McIntosh and Degraves Saw Mills, Tasmania, shilling token dated 1823 is one of Australia’s first and rarest numismatic items. It also represents a kangaroo looking over its shoulder.

    An example of this rare token housed at Museums Victoria collection carries an attribution which says it was possibly minted at Boulton Mint in Soho, England.

    A 1 Shilling 1823 silver token issued by Macintosh & Degraves Sawmills, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia.
    Copyright Museums Victoria, CC BY

    If this is the case, the design may also be linked to the animal in the Stubbs painting.

    Mathew Boulton from the Boulton Mint in England was a friend of Sir Banks, and the two men wrote to each other about the collection of Sarah Sophia Banks. The design element for representing kangaroos could have been passed on by Mathew Boulton to his son who ran the mint by the time the dated 1823 silver kangaroo token was made.

    Thus the very first depictions of kangaroos on early money share links to Sir Banks and some of his contemporaries.

    Tracing the evolution

    A variety of depictions of kangaroos on trade tokens were employed during the 19th century in Australia.

    Some, like the 1855 copper tokens from the John Allen General Stores in Jamberoo, New South Wales, are very rare and known by only a few surviving examples .

    John Allen General Stores (Jamberoo, NSW) token showing the Arms of New South Wales supported by a poorly formed kangaroo and emu.
    Museums Victoria, CC BY

    When I surveyed literature of known Australian tokens during the 19th century about 23% depicted a kangaroo – frequently as an incorporation into a coat of arms.

    After federation, a distinctive official Australian currency emerged. This often used kangaroos as part of a coat of arms design.

    The first sixpence coins were issued in 1911 and carried a common design of a forward facing kangaroo and emu as part of the coat of arms through to 1963.

    On florin coins, which were worth two shillings or 24 pennies in the pre-decimal money system that lasted up until 1966, the style was modernised from 1938 with a newer representation of a kangaroo and emu.

    On pennies and half pennies from 1939 a forward facing kangaroo was the main reverse design and lasted until 1964 when pre-decimal currency began to be phased out.

    New decimal currency was introduced on February 14 1966. Kangaroos appeared on the dollar note.

    The durability of the dollar note was short, however, meaning individual paper notes had to be frequently withdrawn from circulation and replaced. Production of one dollar notes was stopped in 1984.

    The replacement dollar coins featuring the mob of kangaroos proved very durable, and 1984 examples of the coin can still be found in change today.

    On our current decimal coins, that have been in use since the 1960s, the 50 cent piece shows another representation of a kangaroo and emu on the coat of arms that can be found in change over 50 years after their first release.

    The kangaroo and emu on the coat of arms has been on our 50 cent coins for over 50 years.
    Wojciech Boruch/Shutterstock

    Many decimal coins now have special issues featuring kangaroos, like the 2024 Paris Olympic Games two dollar coin series with fun kangaroos performing athletic tricks with icons of the Paris landscape in the backgound.

    The kangaroo has truly become an iconic symbol of Australian numismatics, and now famous coins like the one tonne gold kangaroo coin at the Perth Mint are major tourist attractions showing how far we have come since the first representation in 1795.

    Adrian Dyer receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. He is affiliated with the Australian Numismatic Society.

    ref. We all have kangaroos hopping around our coin purse – and they’ve been on money since 1795 – https://theconversation.com/we-all-have-kangaroos-hopping-around-our-coin-purse-and-theyve-been-on-money-since-1795-258814

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: Sullivan Shapes “One Big Beautiful Bill” to Unleash Alaska’s Economy, Create Good-Paying Jobs, Provide Historic Tax Cuts for Working Families, and Strengthen Health Care

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Alaska Dan Sullivan

    07.01.25

    WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) today voted to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025. This transformative legislation includes numerous provisions to unleash Alaska’s extraordinary resource potential, deliver tax relief for hard-working families and small businesses, make the largest investment for the U.S. Coast Guard in history, secure the southern border and halt the flow of deadly fentanyl, continue the build-up of Alaska-based military, upgrade Alaska’s aviation safety, strengthen Alaska’s health care and nutrition programs, protect Alaska’s most vulnerable communities, and achieve historic savings for future generations.

    “This comprehensive legislation is the product of months of relentless, focused work on behalf of Alaskans—and it delivers significant wins for our state. I think it is safe to say, no state fared better from this bill,” said Sen. Sullivan. “From Day One of these negotiations, which have been going on for months, I fought to ensure that Alaska wasn’t just included, but prioritized. An overriding focus of mine in shaping this legislation was ensuring it helps to unleash Alaska’s private sector economy for the benefit of our hard-working families and more job creation. The One Big Beautiful Bill works in concert with President Trump’s Day One, Alaska-specific executive order to unleash Alaska’s vast natural resource potential, restoring and establishing in law the first Trump administration’s mandate to unlock ANWR, NPR-A, and Cook Inlet for responsible resource development. These provisions are focused on creating good-paying jobs, generating billions of dollars in new revenues for the state, and putting Alaskans back in the driver’s seat of our economic future. Importantly, the historic resource development provisions cement regular lease sales into law for Alaska to guard against attempts by future Democratic administrations and Senate leaders to use regulatory powers to lock up our state and shut down our economy, as was done with President Biden’s 70 executive orders and actions targeting Alaska, what I called the ‘Last Frontier Lock-Up.’

    “A second overriding focus of mine in shaping this legislation was ensuring it benefits Alaska’s working families. On that front, this bill is a home-run. We prevented the largest tax hike in history—more than $4 trillion—and locked in permanent, lower tax rates, an enhanced Child Tax Credit for millions of families, an increased standard deduction used by over 90 percent of taxpayers, a small business deduction that drives job creation and local economic growth, and an enhanced Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit—which incorporates language from a standalone bill I cosponsored, in addition to other deductions that will help Alaskans keep more of what they earn.

    “As Chairman of the Commerce Subcommittee overseeing the U.S. Coast Guard, I also fought to secure the largest investment in Coast Guard history—nearly $25 billion, which includes funding for 16 new icebreakers and $300 million to homeport the Coast Guard icebreaker Storis, in Juneau. And, with the Golden Dome initiative, we’re building the next generation of homeland missile defense—new interceptors, sensors, and radar systems to protect the entire country, with the cornerstone of this vital system continuing to reside in our great state. We’re also working to redevelop existing Arctic infrastructure, like the very strategically located Adak Naval Base in the Aleutians.

    “With this bill, we are also securing our southern border with the most robust enforcement package in a generation—$46 billion for the wall, billions more for Border Patrol and law enforcement, and resources to crack down on the flow of deadly fentanyl into Alaska.

    “Finally, contrary to the fear mongering from critics and naysayers for months on this legislation, I was able to secure significant funding—I am confident it will exceed about $200 million per year for five years—to modernize Alaska’s health system, stabilize our rural providers, improve patient outcomes, keep standalone hospitals open, and empower state leaders to maintain coverage for vulnerable Alaskans. The bill also includes commonsense work requirements for these benefits, ensuring able-bodied Americans utilizing these programs are contributing to our economy, and shoring up the social safety net program for those it was intended to support–struggling single parents, children and individuals with disabilities or mental health challenges. At the same time, Alaska faces challenges that no other state deals with, which is why we secured flexibility for our state government to implement the new Medicaid and SNAP work requirements, giving the state breathing room to fix program challenges without hurting Alaskans who rely on these benefits.

    “From resource development to tax relief for small businesses and middle class families, to national defense, especially our Coast Guard, to securing our border, to strengthening our health care, this legislation reflects years of determined advocacy for Alaska. The final result is a transformative package full of historic wins for Alaska that will positively shape the future of our state for decades to come.”

    1. Growing Alaska’s Economy and Good-Paying Jobs Through Historic Legislation to Unleash Alaska’s Extraordinary Natural Resources

    Senator Sullivan fought to ensure this legislation unleashes Alaska’s natural resource potential, with provisions mandating at least four new area-wide lease sales in the ANWR Coastal Plain over the next decade, directing the Secretary of the Interior to expeditiously resume at least five lease sales in the NPR-A, and mandating a minimum of six lease sales over 10 years in Cook Inlet. The bill reopens areas designated as available for oil and gas leasing during the first Trump administration, and directs more revenues from the NPR-A, ANWR, and Cook Inlet to the State of Alaska, increasing the state’s percentage of the share to 70 percent for future leases. The legislation restores the leasing rules implemented during the first Trump administration—key to unlocking federal revenues from resource development in both ANWR and the NPR-A. The bill streamlines environmental reviews under NEPA by allowing project sponsors to opt into expedited timelines through a fee-based system—cutting review periods in half. The bill also creates a new Energy Dominance Financing program at the Department of Energy that has the potential to accelerate the momentum of the Alaska LNG project.

    Finally, the bill requires increased timber harvests and long-term contracts in national forests and on public lands, including in the Tongass National Forest.

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025:

    • Requires BLM to hold at least 4 additional area-wide ANWR lease sales in the Coastal Plain over the next 10 years, with revenues divided 70 percent for the State of Alaska and 30 percent for the federal government starting in 2034—up from 50 percent;
    • Requires the Secretary of the Interior to expeditiously restore and resume lease sales under the NPR–A oil and gas program as directed by federal law—5 lease sales within 10 years of enactment under terms, conditions, stipulations, and areas described in the first Trump administration’s 2020 NPR-A Integrated Activity Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision—and directs that the State of Alaska receive 70 percent of revenues generated from development activity on future leases starting in 2034–up from 50 percent;
    • Requires a minimum of six lease sales over 10 years in Cook Inlet, with at least 1 million acres per sale and with revenues divided 70 percent for the State of Alaska and 30 percent for the federal government starting in 2034—up from 27 percent;
    • Reverses the Biden-era royalty hike by reinstating a lower 12.5-16.67 percent on offshore and onshore federal oil and gas leases;
    • Restores commonsense leasing rules that we saw under the first Trump administration that are a prerequisite to generating federal revenues from production in both the NPR-A and in ANWR—more lands, more leasing on a more prescriptive timeline;
    • Streamlines the NEPA environmental review process by allowing project sponsors to opt in for faster timelines through a fee-based system, halving review periods;
    • Includes a $5 billion increase for critical minerals supply chains, opening new opportunities for Alaska’s mining industry;
    • Requires increased timber harvests and long-term contracts in national forests and public lands, including in the Tongass National Forest;
    • Creates a new Energy Dominance Financing program within the Department of Energy to support enhancement and development of reliable energy infrastructure, providing another vehicle for the Alaska LNG project to accelerate development of the gasline;
    • Places a 10-year moratorium on the methane tax; and
    • Provides $1 billion for the Defense Production Act to conduct critical mineral mining operations, including in Alaska.

    “This energy package is a huge victory for Alaska’s jobs and economy, and for America’s energy future,” Sen. Sullivan said. “It’s time to unleash Alaska’s extraordinary resource potential: This bill mandates lease sales—1.6 million acres in ANWR, 20 million acres in NPR-A, and millions of acres in Cook Inlet—so we can tap into the state’s vast resources and create good-paying jobs for thousands of Alaskans. Importantly, we were able to secure a strong 70-30 split for ANWR, Cook Inlet, and future NPRA-leases, which will deliver untold new revenues to the State of Alaska.

    “Combined with President Trump’s Executive Order, ‘Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential,’ this is a huge opportunity to jump start natural resource development and create new jobs in Alaska. These Alaska-driven provisions will lower energy costs for American families, create good-paying jobs for Alaskans, and generate billions in new federal revenues to realize our energy potential and put Alaskans back in the driver’s seat of our state’s economy.”

    1. Delivering Tax Relief for Hard-Working Families and Small Businesses

    In 2017, Sen. Sullivan voted for the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which included across-the-board tax cuts for small businesses and middle class families, and a doubling of the child tax credit to support working families and small businesses, and spur economic growth. Without Congress’ action, those tax cuts and tax credit increases were due to expire this year, which would amount to a $4.5 trillion tax hike on all Americans. It’s also important to note, contrary to what some critics of the legislation have said, under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025, millionaires and billionaires will be paying the exact same marginal tax rates as they do currently. There is no tax cut for them.

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025:

    • Avoids a massive $4.5 trillion tax increase on Americans by extending the 2017 tax cuts;
    • Institutes a permanent $2,200 child tax credit and tax relief amounting to an estimated annual take-home pay increase of $7,600-$10,900 for a family of four;
    • Expands tax credits to make child care more affordable for the thousands of working families in Alaska that are in need of quality, affordable child care:
      • Specifically, this bill enhances the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, the only tax credit that specifically helps working parents offset the cost of child care. This provision builds on stand-alone legislation that Sen. Sullivan cosponsored;
      • Improves the Employer-Provided Child Care Credit which supports businesses that want to help locate or provide child care for employees;
      • Expands the Dependent Care Assistance Plan which creates flexible spending accounts that allow working parents to set aside pre-tax dollars to pay for child care expenses;
    • Eliminates taxes on tips and overtime for millions of workers, and taxes on auto loan interest for new American-made vehicles;
    • Expands tax relief for small businesses, which constitute 99.1 percent of businesses in Alaska, benefiting the backbone of Alaska’s economy; and
    • Makes permanent the opportunity zone, low-income housing, and new markets tax credits—key incentives for economic development and affordable housing, and adds greater emphasis on economically disadvantaged and rural areas.

    “I have always fought to ensure hard-working Alaskans are able to keep more of their paycheck, and our small businesses are able to grow and hire more workers,” said Sen. Sullivan. “With this legislation, we are preserving the historic tax relief delivered for Alaskans in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and providing new relief for our workers and small businesses. Specifically, this bill prevents an average $2,380 tax hike on every Alaskan and a 25 percent tax increase on over 58,000 of Alaska’s small businesses. For Alaska’s working families, the bill permanently boosts the per-child tax credit to $2,200, preserves the doubling of the standard deduction we secured in 2017, and expands tax credits for paid family leave and child care—which I cosponsored in stand-alone legislation. The bill also eliminates taxes on tips, benefiting roughly one-in-ten Alaskans who work in our service and leisure industries. In sum, this bill will deliver a take-home pay increase of up to $10,900 for a family of four.

    “The historic tax relief we are delivering in this bill, coupled with the legislation’s unprecedented provisions to unleash Alaska natural resources—working in concert with President Trump’s Day One, Alaska-specific executive order—bring together all of the elements needed to achieve strong growth in Alaska’s private sector economy. Importantly, that will mean more good-paying jobs for more of Alaska’s families.”

    1. Making the Largest Investment in U.S. Coast Guard History

    As Chairman of the Senate Commerce Subcommittee on the Coast Guard, Sen. Sullivan has consistently championed robust investments in our Coast Guard. Sen. Sullivan’s strong advocacy in the negotiations of the One Big Beautiful Bill of Act 2025 resulted in nearly $25 billion for fiscal year 2026 to the U.S. Coast Guard, including:

    • 16 new icebreakers—three Polar Security Cutters (heavy icebreakers), three Arctic Security Cutters (medium polar icebreakers), and 10 light and medium icebreaking cutters; 
    • 22 new cutters—nine Offshore Patrol Cutters, 10 Fast Response Cutters, and three Waterways Commerce Cutters;
    • More than 40 new helicopters, six new C-130J aircraft, three new river cutters, and new maritime surveillance equipment (Many of these new Coast Guard aviation and ship assets will be coming to Alaska);
    • $300 million for the homeporting of the Juneau icebreaker, the Storis; and
    • $4.379 billion to repair docks, hangars, and shore facilities and replace aging infrastructure, funds that will help address the Coast Guard’s nationwide infrastructure backlog, as found in communities like Sitka, Seward, Kodiak and St. Paul.

    “This historic investment of nearly $25 billion for the U.S. Coast Guard—the largest investment in Coast Guard history—is a game-changer for the men and women who protect our nation’s oceans and maritime communities, especially in Alaska,” Sen. Sullivan said. “With funding for 17 new icebreakers, 21 cutters, dozens of aircraft, and billions to modernize docks and shore facilities–particularly in Alaska, we’re strengthening America’s maritime presence in the Arctic and along our vast coastline. I’ve been working for years to get an icebreaker homeported in Alaska. This is the next critical step: $300 million to support icebreaker homeporting in Juneau—cementing Alaska’s role as the nation’s Arctic operations hub. This investment will create good-paying jobs throughout Southeast Alaska, bolster our national security, and ensure our Coast Guard has the tools it needs to protect our waters and our communities for decades to come.”

    1. Securing the Border and Fighting Fentanyl

    Senator Sullivan has long advocated for stronger policies to secure the nation’s southern border, highlighting the negative impacts of President Biden’s four years of open border policies on all states, including those that are thousands of miles away, like Alaska. For two years in a row, Alaska experienced the largest annual increase in the rate of drug overdose deaths in the country, driven in large part by the flow of fentanyl across the porous border. In recognition of the havoc this crisis has wrought on Alaska’s communities, the Senator last year spearheaded the launch of a statewide “One Pill Can Kill” initiative to educate Alaskans about the dangers of the drug and raise awareness about the resources available for treatment, prevention and reporting criminal activity.

    This legislation provides billions of dollars for our border security, funding and personnel to the immigration court system, materials and manpower to build the southern border wall, funding for Border Patrol and fleet vehicles, enhanced and upgraded Border Patrol technology, and additional law enforcement funding, including for DHS, DOJ, ICE, Secret Service, and federal courts.

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 provides:

    • $46 billion for a southern border wall, $8 billion for Border Patrol and fleet vehicles, $6 billion for border patrol technology;
    • $47.8 billion in additional law enforcement funding, including for DHS, DOJ, ICE, and Secret Service, and federal courts and detention facilities; and
    • $1.25 billion in funding for the immigration court system.

    “This Homeland Security package is a critical step toward securing our borders and stopping the flow of deadly fentanyl into our country, a crisis that is even impacting Alaska,” Sen. Sullivan said. “Alaska’s communities, from our biggest cities to rural villages, have dealt with the deadly consequences of a porous southern border. For years, fentanyl poured into our state, surging overdose deaths by more than 40% between 2022 and 2023, and taking the lives of far too many young people. Thankfully, since President Trump came into office, illegal border crossings have dropped by 99%. These provisions will continue this enforcement of our border and stop this scourge of illegal aliens, drug cartels, and fentanyl from devastating communities across the country.”

    1. Building Up Our Alaska-based Military

    Taking care of our troops and rebuilding our military guided by a policy of “Peace Through Strength” have been top priorities of Senator Sullivan since he joined the Senate Armed Services Committee. The strong military provisions in this bill include several major benefits for Alaska.

    The bill allocates $9 billion to improve the quality of life for service members—enhancing housing, child care, and health care services at Alaska’s many military bases—building on the historic 14.5 percent military pay raise for junior enlisted warfighters that Senator Sullivan helped secure in last year’s National Defense Authorization Act. It also provides $115 million to support the exploration and development of existing Arctic infrastructure, like the critical Adak Naval Air Station in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands and invests $9 billion in air superiority efforts that will help sustain aircraft and operations at Eielson Air Force Base and Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER).

    The bill also invests heavily in missile defense systems—with $1.975 billion that could enhance radar sites like the Long Range Discrimination Radar at Clear Space Force Station, the COBRA DANE radar on Shemya, and other installations across the state. Alaska may also benefit from $800 million for next-generation interceptors at Fort Greely, and $500 million for national security space launch infrastructure that could include the Kodiak Pacific Spaceport. These investments are part of President Trump’s $25 billion “Golden Dome for America” initiative, which accelerates the development of a layered missile defense system to protect the homeland—cementing Alaska’s position at the forefront of national security. Senator Sullivan’s GOLDEN DOME Act would further add to the money appropriated by the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act to protect Alaska and the nation.

    Additionally, Alaska stands to gain from the $12 billion Pacific Deterrence Initiative, which includes expanded military exercises involving Alaska Command, and from the $29 billion shipbuilding provision, which will likely strengthen U.S. Navy maritime presence to help safeguard Alaska’s waters.

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 includes:

    • A $25 billion down payment on President Trump’s “Golden Dome for America” initiative to build a layered missile defense system, positioning Alaska as the central pillar;
      • $1.975 billion for improved missile defense radars, potentially benefiting LRDR at Clear Space Force Station, COBRA DANE on Shemya Island, and other Alaska radar sites;
      • $800 million for next-generation interceptors going to Fort Greely;
      • $500 million for space launch infrastructure, which could include the Kodiak Pacific Spaceport;
    • $115 million for the exploration and development of existing Arctic infrastructure, like the shuttered Adak Naval Air Station in Alaska’s Aleutian Islands;
    • $9 billion to improve military quality of life—including housing, childcare, and healthcare at Alaska military bases;
    • $9 billion for air superiority, supporting aircraft operations at Eielson Air Force Base and JBER;
    • $12 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, expanding military exercises involving Alaska Command; and
    • $29 billion for shipbuilding.

    “Taking care of our troops and achieving ‘Peace Through Strength’ are two of my top priorities. This legislation includes funding for Alaska’s air defense superiority, readiness missions, maritime fleet, as well as an investment in better housing, child care, and health care at bases across Alaska,” said Sen. Sullivan. The escalating missile threats from the Iranian regime—and the rapidly advancing capabilities of Russia and China—make clear why we must build a robust, modernized missile defense system to protect the entire country. That’s exactly what the Golden Dome initiative will do. With President Trump’s leadership, a $25 billion down payment in this legislation, and the Golden Dome Act I introduced with my colleagues to cement this vision in law, we now have all three pillars of effective policy: presidential backing, appropriated funding, and authorizing legislation. This initiative will deploy space-based sensors and next-generation interceptors, and significantly enhance our all-domain awareness. Alaska will remain the cornerstone of America’s missile defense, and I look forward to advancing this historic effort to secure our homeland.”

    1. Upgrading Alaska’s Aviation Safety

    Alaska faces an aviation accident rate 2.35 times higher than the national average, and this legislation delivers major, long-overdue investments to address that challenge head-on. The Alaska-specific aviation safety provisions in this legislation include the installation of Weather Observing Systems and weather camera sites, as well as a $40 million carve out for the FAA  Alaska Aviation Safety Initiative. These provisions are in addition to a federal overhaul of aviation safety announced by President Trump earlier this year that includes the addition of 174 new weather stations specifically for Alaska.

    Included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act:

    • $2.5 billion for nationwide air traffic control reform and upgrades;
    • $80 million to install not less than 50 Automated Weather Observing Systems (AWOS), not less than 60 Visual Weather Observing Systems (VWOS), not less than 64 weather camera sites, and weather stations; and
    • $40 million to carry out aviation safety projects in the FAA Alaska Aviation Safety Initiative, other than the activities funded from the set aside for weather observation systems.

    “With dozens of communities off the road system and wholly reliant on aviation, and an air traffic control system responsible for the heavily-trafficked aviation routes between North America and Asia, no state is more aware of our country’s aviation safety challenges than Alaska,” said Sen. Sullivan. “This bill includes historic critical upgrades to Alaska’s aviation safety equipment and funding for the FAA Alaska Aviation Safety Initiative. These weather observing systems and camera sites will provide real-time weather data and visual confirmation in remote areas with harsh, rapidly changing conditions, ensuring that Alaska’s pilots have the technology they need to fly as safely as possible.”

    1. Strengthening Alaska’s Health Care

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 does not touch Medicare or Social Security despite false ads running in Alaska saying the contrary. The major Medicaid reform in this bill centers around limitations and reductions of states’ use of provider taxes and state-directed payments to enhance their federal Medicaid payments. Many observers view the use of provider taxes and state-directed payments as a scheme to enhance a state’s share of federal Medicaid dollars. Because Alaska is the only state in the country that doesn’t use provider taxes or state-directed payments, and never has, its Medicaid program and federal funds that the state receives are not impacted by the provider tax reforms in the bill.

    Senator Sullivan has been working for years on legislation to increase Alaska’s Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) by 25 percent and Hawaii’s FMAP by 15 percent to better reflect the high cost of living and high cost of health care delivery in both states. This FMAP provision was included in the original budget reconciliation bill with White House and Senate Republican support. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that this provision would have generated approximately an additional $180 million in increased annual Medicaid dollars for Alaska.

    However, during the final stages of the budget reconciliation debate, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats challenged Sen. Sullivan’s FMAP provision with the intent to strip it out of the budget reconciliation bill during a series of “Byrd baths.” Following this review, the Senate Parliamentarian advised that the provision violated the requirements of the Byrd Rule, resulting in its removal from the bill and costing Alaska potentially millions of dollars in additional annual Medicaid funding.

    In response, Senator Sullivan pivoted and pursued an alternative solution. To address Alaska’s limited health care infrastructure, he successfully negotiated a $25 billion increase for the Rural Health Transformation Fund in the budget reconciliation bill, bringing it to $50 billion.  Senator Sullivan helped shape the formula for this fund to allocate $100 million annually for Alaska for five years. He is confident that additional funding from this fund to Alaska will exceed another $100 million.

    In total, this fund is anticipated to provide over $200 million annually for five years to help expand access and improve health care across Alaska, support providers in remote communities, and reduce the state’s Medicaid application backlog through the Alaska Division of Public Assistance.

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025:

    • Creates a $50 billion fund over five years to help states modernize and stabilize rural health care, improve outcomes, and keep standalone hospitals open, of which Alaska will likely receive at least $200 million annually over five years;
    • Institutes a 20-hour per week work requirement for able-bodied individuals to utilize Medicaid if they do not have children 14 years of age or younger (one-third less than the work requirements established by the bipartisan welfare reform in the 1990s under the Clinton administration);
    • Allows states to delay implementation of Medicaid work requirements if showing “good faith” effort to create work requirement processes through 2028;
    • Requires identity verification for ACA special enrollment to stop fraud targeting Alaska Native benefits.

    “For months, I have worked relentlessly on every aspect of this reconciliation bill to make sure Alaska isn’t just included, but prioritizedincluding our health care and nutrition programs,” said Sen. Sullivan. “My team and I also fought hard to secure a $50 billion fund to help states, like Alaska, modernize health systems, stabilize rural providers, improve patient outcomes, and keep standalone hospitals open. Thanks to this provision and commitments I received from the Trump administration, I am confident that Alaska will receive over $200 million a yearfor five yearsto empower our state leaders to  maintain coverage for vulnerable Alaskans and shore up our state’s social safety net.

    “Additionally, the Medicaid provisions in this bill will make this critical safety net program stronger, more accountable, and more sustainable—especially for Alaskans. Our goal is simple: maintain strong safety nets, reduce barriers to care, and grow good-paying jobs across Alaska so more people can thrive and get covered through the private sector.

    “I do support Medicaid work requirements for those who are able, but we made sure to include commonsense, tailored work exemptions, including for Alaska Native people, those who live in places with low employment opportunities, pregnant women, and people with mental health and substance use disorders.

    “Many of Alaska’s hospitals operate on the financial edge while continuing to serve as the backbone of care in remote regions. They are critical to Alaska’s health care system, and this legislation—the result of months of work from me and my team—ensures our hospitals will receive the Alaska-specific plus-ups and protections they need to continue serving our communities.”

    1. Protecting Alaska’s Most Vulnerable Communities

    Senator Sullivan worked to ensure the legislation included provisions directly aimed at protecting Alaska’s most vulnerable communities, especially seniors and those facing financial hardship. For seniors and elder Alaskans, the bill provides a $12,000 tax deduction to reduce Social Security taxes, with estimated average savings of between $9,000–$17,500 for seniors ages 60 and up. The legislation also allows telehealth copays to be covered by insurance outside of high-deductible thresholds—making virtual care more affordable for rural and senior populations, and exempts seniors over 65 from Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) work requirements.

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 also expands home-and community-based services for individuals with disabilities, repeals harmful Biden-era nursing home staffing mandates, and includes a 2.5 percent Medicare reimbursement increase for FY 2026—known as the “doc fix”—to ensure that seniors utilizing Medicare continue to have access to care.

    The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025:

    • Provides a $12,000 tax deduction for seniors 65 and older to reduce Social Security taxes and help retirees keep more of their income;
    • Maintains the existing 100 percent federal match for Alaska Native and American Indian people accessing Medicaid, and exempts them entirely from Medicaid work requirements;
    • Estimates tax relief savings for seniors age 60 and older between $9,000-$17,500;
    • Exempts seniors over 65 from Medicaid and SNAP work requirements;
    • Provides additional time for the State of Alaska to resolve its SNAP distribution error rate and carves out SNAP work requirement exemptions for areas with high unemployment rates;
    • Delays implementation of new SNAP work requirements if they are showing “good faith” effort through 2028;
    • Permanently extends key tax-free savings provisions for Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) accounts, allowing individuals with disabilities to save for their future without losing access to Medicaid and Social Security;
    • Allows telehealth copays to be covered by insurance outside of overall health insurance deductibles, making it easier for seniors and Alaskans in rural areas to use telehealth; and
    • Allows telehealth copays to be covered by insurance outside of overall health insurance deductibles, making it easier for seniors and Alaskans in rural areas to use telehealth;
    • Expands home- and community-based care for people with disabilities;
    • Includes a 2.5 percent Medicare reimbursement rate increase for FY 2026—known as the “doc fix”—to ensure that seniors utilizing Medicare continue to have access to care; and
    • Repeals Biden-era nursing home staffing mandates that threatened to close Alaska nursing home facilities, a top priority of rural health care providers.

    “My team and I worked hard to ensure the One Big Beautiful Bill protects Alaska’s most vulnerable communities, especially our seniors and those struggling to make ends meet,” said Sen. Sullivan. “We secured provisions that will provide real relief, like a $12,000 tax deduction that helps older Alaskans keep more of their hard-earned retirement income, and expanded telehealth access that makes care more affordable and accessible in our rural communities. We also were able to exempt seniors from burdensome work requirements and repeal a disastrous Biden-era federal nursing home mandate that threatened to close facilities across our state.

    “Contrary to some of the fear-mongering by critics, this bill makes no changes to Medicare or Social Security. Programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP were created to protect our most vulnerable populations, and this legislation helps ensure that these social safety net programs are there for Americans and Alaskans who need them.

    “My team and I also secured flexibility for implementing both the new Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) work requirements for Alaska, including exemptions for all Alaska Native people, parents or guardians of children 14 and under, caregivers for elders and adults with disabilities, individuals who are medically frail or are dealing with a substance use disorder, veterans, pregnant women, and areas of high unemployment. With regard to SNAP, I helped secure a delay for Alaska to implement these work requirements until 2029 based on a good faith effort. These flexibilities will be crucial to ensuring our state’s most vulnerable continue to receive benefits while allowing the State breathing room to adjust to the new requirements under the bill.

    “This bill provides good governance cost-sharing measures to ensure that states properly administer their programs and get SNAP benefits to people who need it most. However, the State of Alaska is working on modernizing their system to administer their program and will need extra time to complete the overhaul. I pushed intensely to secure up to a two-year delay before the cost-sharing measures come into play. This crucial delay will provide the State the time it needs to overhaul their system and improve their program—ultimately ensuring that people who need SNAP the most, are the ones who receive it.”

    IX. Achieving Historic Savings for Our Children’s Future

    Sen. Sullivan shares the serious concern many Alaskans have about the size and scope of federal spending, especially the risks posed by the country’s $36 trillion debt. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 represents one of the largest federal spending reductions in American history, roughly $1.6 trillion, and will reduce the federal budget deficit by $508 billion over ten years. According to the White House Council of Economic Advisers, the legislation will result in the debt-to-GDP ratio falling to between 88 and 99 percent, instead of rising to 117 percent without the bill.

    “Our national debt of over $36 trillion has reached dangerous, unsustainable levels. Last year, we paid out more in interest on this debt—upwards of $950 billion—than we did to fund our military at about $870 billion,” said Sen. Sullivan. “When you look at history, great powers begin to fail when they hit this precarious inflection point—spending more in interest on the debt than they do to protect their own nation. These debt and spending levels also drive high inflation rates, as we’ve seen over the past few years, which remain the top concern of Alaskan families—the high cost of living. This bill includes one of largest spending reductions in history—$1.6 trillion, and will reduce the deficit by $508 billion over ten years. The bill accomplishes these reductions by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse—not by cutting essential services.”

    X. Fighting Back Against Senate Democrats and Minority Leader Schumer’s Relentless Attempts to Shut Down Alaska’s Economy and Harm Our Citizens

    In the budget reconciliation process, the parliamentarian of the Senate only rules on provisions of the bill when they are challenged by Democrat or Republican party leaders, to see if those provisions violate the so-called “Byrd Rule,” which dictates that a provision in reconciliation legislation must be principally focused on the budget, spending and taxes. The Byrd rule and the parliamentarian’s role are not self-executing, meaning, the parliamentarian does not scrub budget reconciliation bills looking for violations of the Byrd rule. She only looks into these issues if those issues are challenged by the Republican or Democratic Senate leaders.

    In this bill, Democrats in the Senate, led by Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, challenged nearly every single provision in the bill that would benefit Alaska. The most egregious was Sen. Sullivan’s provision, which he’s worked on for years, to increase the federal match for Medicaid in Alaska. Sen. Sullivan secured the provision in the bill, which was supported by all Senate Republicans and the White House, and would have provided Alaska with hundreds of millions of dollars more a year in federal Medicaid dollars.

    The irony of this outcome is particularly strong given that far-left-wing Democrat-affiliated groups have been falsely attacking Senator Sullivan for weeks on cutting Medicaid. The only people objectively and factually trying to cut Medicaid for Alaskans are Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats, who successfully did so when they stripped out Sen. Sullivan’s FMAP provision for Alaska that was already in the budget reconciliation bill.

    Other provisions that would dramatically help Alaska, but were challenged by Sen. Schumer and the Senate Democratic leadership to strip out of the budget reconciliation bill, include:

    • ANWR leases;
    • NPR-A leases;
    • Cook Inlet leases;
    • Increased funding for rural Alaska hospitals;
    • Coast Guard funding for Alaska, including facilities for the new icebreaker home-ported in Juneau;
    • Funding for potential Arctic military bases;
    • Border security;
    • Charitable deductions for Alaska whaling communities; and
    • Greater flexibility for SNAP requirements.

    “Here is an undeniable fact: The only people who are advocating cutting Medicaid for Alaskans are Chuck Schumer and the Senate Democrats,” said Sen. Sullivan. “Worse, this is just one of a number of positive provisions for Alaska that Senate Democrats’ fought to strip out of the budget reconciliation bill. This is consistent with the long pattern of National Democrats’ attempts, for decades, to lock up our state, shut down our economy, and hurt our working families.”

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lummis Releases List of Wyoming Wins in One Big Beautiful Bill

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wyoming Cynthia Lummis

    July 1, 2025

    Washington, D.C. – Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) today released the following statement and list highlighting some Wyoming specific wins included in the One Big Beautiful Bill that passed the Senate today.  

    “The One Big Beautiful Bill represents a victory for our state and our nation’s future,” Lummis said. “This legislation reverses years of federal policies that hurt Wyoming’s energy workers and families, instead focusing on real American priorities: expanding domestic energy production, cutting taxes for working families, and backing our ranchers and farmers.”

    Background: 

    Coal Industry:

    • Reduced Royalty Rates: Cuts federal coal royalty rates from 12.5% to 7% for new and existing leases through 2034 to incentivize production and increase revenue.
    • Mandatory New Leases: Requires Interior Secretary to lease at least 4 million additional acres of known recoverable coal reserves within 90 days of enactment.
    • Enhanced Market Access: Eliminates regulatory barriers that have prevented coal development on federal lands.

    Oil & Gas:

    • Quarterly Lease Sales: Mandates BLM hold quarterly lease sales in nine Western states, including Wyoming, for ten years.
    • Extended Drilling Permits: Increases drilling permits from three to four years, providing greater operational certainty.
    • Eliminated Bureaucratic Fees: Removes the $5-per-acre Expression of Interest Fee that previously discouraged land nominations.
    • Restored Competitive Framework: Reinstates noncompetitive leasing to encourage exploration and streamlines surface commingling applications.
    • Fair Royalty Rates: Restores pre–Inflation Reduction Act royalty rate of 12.5%, reversing punitive increases.
    • Faster NEPA Timelines: Introduces optional expedited environmental review process under NEPA, allowing project sponsors to pay fees for faster timelines (one year for Environmental Impact Statements, six months for Environmental Assessments).

    Timber Sales & Wildfire Prevention:

    • Mandatory Timber Contracts: Requires USFS to enter 40 long-term timber sale contracts between 2025-2034 to reduce wildfire risk, boost the economy, and create WY jobs.

    State & Local Revenue:

    • Fair Revenue Distribution: Directs 25% of renewable energy revenue from public lands to state where the lease operates. 
    • County Support: Allocates additional 25% to counties based on project location, ensuring local communities benefit from development.

    Bureau of Reclamation Investment:

    • $1 Billion Investment: Dedicated funding for restoration and expansion of surface water storage facilities. Wyoming has seven irrigation districts and water storage capacity.
    • Conveyance Facility Improvements: Funds construction activities that restore or increase capacity of existing facilities.

    Livestock Protection:

    • Depredation Reimbursement: Provides compensation for livestock losses due to wolves, bears, and eagles.
    • Drought/Fire Relief: Expands eligibility and payments for grazing losses on federal lands
    • Risk Management: Strengthens programs for disease preparedness, lab testing, and vaccine stockpiles.

    Market Access & Production:

    • Export Promotion: Creates permanent $285 million annual USDA program for agricultural export marketing.
    • Base Acre Expansion: Allows enrollment of up to 30 million new base acres to address Western producer inequities.
    • Production History Recognition: Includes previously ineligible lands in farm programs.

    Estate Tax Relief:

    • Increased Exemption: Raises estate tax exemption to $15 million (single)/$30 million (married), indexed for inflation.
    • Generational Help: Helps families pass ranches and farms to next generation without crushing tax burden.

    Business Investment Incentives:

    • Equipment Expensing: Restores 100% immediate expensing for new and used equipment – making it easier to invest in growth and resilience strategies for our hard-working ranchers
    • Investment Threshold: Raises immediate expensing cap to $2.5 million for equipment and property purchases.
    • Rural Economic Development: Provides powerful tools for reinvestment in operations and rural community growth.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Interview – ABC Radio National with David Lipson

    Source: Murray Darling Basin Authority

    DAVID LIPSON: David Lipson with you here on Radio National Breakfast, and a warning that the following story does contain distressing content about child abuse.

    Australia’s approach to child safety is once again in the national spotlight after that case of a Melbourne childcare worker who’s been charged with more than 70 offences, including sexual assault and producing child abuse material.

    In the wake of the allegations levelled against 26-year-old Joshua Dale Brown, around 1,200 children in Victoria have now been urged to undergo health screening. Meanwhile, police have confirmed that the alleged offender had a valid working with children check, it’s sparked calls for greater national oversight and regulation of child care centres.

    Joining me now to discuss all of this is Jason Clare. He’s the Federal Minister for Education. Welcome to Radio National Breakfast.

    JASON CLARE, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION: Good morning, Dave.

    LIPSON: Jason Clare, a lot of parents who would be very nervous about dropping their kids off this morning.  What’s your message to them?

    CLARE: Any Australian who heard the news yesterday would be sickened by what they heard. For parents of the children that are affected by this that got a notification from authorities yesterday, they’d be terrified, and rightly so. But worse than that, angry. I know that because one of the families that got notification yesterday is a friend of mine, and I can’t repeat what she told me because this is morning radio, but they’re furious, and now they’ve got to go through all the crap to make sure that their children are safe.

    What I would say more broadly to the general community is that we do have a good early education and care system. Some of the angriest people this morning are the people turning up for work, working in our child care centres around the country, who overwhelmingly do a great job, who love our kids, care for our kids, educate our kids; they’re furious as well.

    There’s been important steps taken over the last few years to make our centres safe, but not enough. More needs to be done. I was informed about this just over a week ago by the Victorian Government. It’s the reason I put this on the agenda for Education Ministers when we met last Friday.

    LIPSON: Okay. So, it was on the agenda last Friday, and you talked about it then; you say you were informed more than a week ago. Should parents have been told earlier than yesterday?

    CLARE: I’m certain that the Victorian Government took the steps that they needed to take with police and with the relevant authorities to make sure that when they advised parents and did so as soon as they possibly could, they were in a position to provide the necessary advice and support for parents.

    LIPSON: Okay. Well, let’s talk about what can be done to prevent this, because you’ve already banned phones and devices in child care centres, but this man is still accused of producing child abuse material. You have said you’ll bring in legislation to Parliament to cut off funding to child care centres that aren’t up to scratch, but how will these changes help stop sexual offenders?

    CLARE: There’s no one silver bullet here. One of the things that we needed to do was ban phones in centres, the use of personal mobile phones. We did that for a reason. We did that on advice from the national safety regulator after the paedophile was caught and convicted in Queensland.

    LIPSON: Are you concerned, though, that, you know, that it seems that phones and devices at least are allegedly at the centre of this case in Victoria as well?

    CLARE: Yes, I am. Yes, I am, and that’s why we’ve got to get phones out of centres. We’ve made it clear now in law that phones, personal phones or personal devices cannot be used in these centres. The key recommendation from the national safety regulator, and as I said, it comes out of the review that I commissioned after a paedophile was arrested and convicted in Queensland, but it’s only one of the things that we need to do here.  

    One of the real powers that we have as a Commonwealth Government is funding. If a centre’s not up to scratch, if they’re not meeting safety standards and quality standards, there’s got to be consequences. The Federal Government provides something like 70 per cent of the funding that operates centres, and if they’re not meeting standards, if they’re not cutting the mustard, then we’ve got to have the power to cut their funding, to pull funding from centres. That’s what we announced that we would do in March; that’s what the legislation that we’re preparing now is all about.

    LIPSON: And when will that legislation be in place? You’ve said a couple of months. Can it be fast-tracked?

    CLARE: I’ve asked my Department to get the legislation drafted as quickly as we possibly can, but it’s just one of the things that we’re doing, David. The meeting of Education Ministers that happened on Friday looked at the Wheeler Report, you’ll remember Adele Ferguson’s expose on Four Corners from a couple of months ago that revealed some shocking abuse and mistreatment of children in child care centres in New South Wales, that led to an independent report by Chris Wheeler, the former Deputy Ombudsman in New South Wales. His report was handed down last Thursday. The Government in New South Wales is committed to implement those recommendations. Chris briefed us on Friday. Now we’re looking at how we can potentially implement Chris’ recommendations right across the country, as well as the recommendations of the national safety regulator, and Early Education Ministers are going to meet again next month and the month after that as we try to pull together all of the things that we need to do to make our children safe. This is serious, and it requires serious action.

    LIPSON: It certainly does. I mean, you’ve talked about the legislation that should come to Federal Parliament about cutting funding from child care centres that aren’t up to scratch. That presumably would be after the fact. You’ve also talked about standardising police checks, but police checks only show up when the person’s already been convicted of a crime. So, you know, this is really difficult stuff.

    CLARE: That’s right.

    LIPSON: This alleged offender in Victoria we’re told worked at 20 odd sites. Do you think at some point, a person’s employment history could be a red flag or prompt some sort of mandatory check?

    CLARE: Yeah. And that’s one of the things that we’ve got to look at here. You’re right, Working with Children Checks aren’t a silver bullet. This alleged perpetrator had no criminal record; it’s why they had a Working with Children Check. That doesn’t mean, though, that Working with Children Checks can’t be improved right across the country.

    I spoke to the Attorney General about this last week, and she informed me that this will be on the agenda when Attorney Generals meet next month. There’s work underway that needs to be done there to improve information sharing between states as well as near real-time monitoring when there’s changes to people’s criminal history, but there’s other things that need to be done too, where there are potential red flags where people are moving.  

    There’s also work that needs to be done to develop a national register of educators. There’s a register for teachers; there’s not a register for educators in centres. That’s one of the other potential tools here to help keep children safe.

    LIPSON: The nationalised harmonised or national harmonised Working with Children Check system was actually recommended 10 years ago by a Royal Commission into institutional abuse. Why hasn’t it been done?

    CLARE: It’s too slow. I accept that, and this is work that is led by, in most states, Attorneys General, but in other states it might be Community Services Ministers. That’s why it’s on the agenda next month when AGs meet, and they’ll look at a number of things that need to be done to fix that, to improve that.

    But let’s not assume that that is the silver bullet here because there’s other things that need to be done too.

    LIPSON: There are a lot of for profit centres that are now in this sector, and this is something that Adele Ferguson’s work really looked into. Should they be in the sector? Is this a factor, do you think, in these horrific cases?

    CLARE: Whether you’re a for profit centre or a not for profit centre, your number one priority has got to be the safety of the children who you’re looking after and caring for. So, in that sense, I don’t care if it’s for profit or not for profit, what I care about are the children in the centre, and overwhelmingly most of the people who run and work these centres are good, honest, hard working people who dedicate their lives to looking after our children. Whether it’s for profit or not for profit the key is that they’ve got to meet that standard when it comes to safety and quality, and if they don’t, then there’s got to be consequences, and that’s what the legislation’s about.

    Can I double back to one point you made a moment ago made around Working with Children Checks? One of the other things that we’re looking at here is around the right sort of training that early educators get when they’re at TAFE or at university around child safety. This is already part of the qualifications, part of the course, but there’s more potentially that can be done here to help people who work in centres to identify people who are grooming or identify people who are up to no good.

    LIPSON: Thanks for making that point. I guess the question about for profit centres that I wanted to get to is around the enormous subsidies that the Federal Government provides. There’s a lot of money sloshing around in the system, and if you’ve got, you know, companies that are listed on the stock exchange that are, you know, the recipient of a lot of that government money, is that part of the problem here, and especially at a time when the Federal Government is looking at universal child care. Is there a fear or a concern that that could exacerbate the problem by kind of bringing in or encouraging profit-driven cowboys into the system?

    CLARE: This is now fundamentally an essential service for more than a million families across the country. It helps parents return to work, but more than that, this is a service that helps our children get ready for school.

    Ask any principal at a local primary school, and they will tell you they can tell the children that have been in child care and pre school and the ones that haven’t. They help to make sure that young people are ready to start learning when they get to school.

    Now at the moment, there are some kids who miss out altogether, kids from really disadvantaged backgrounds. Building a universal system is fundamentally about helping them. We need to make it affordable; that’s what cutting the cost of child care over the last few years has been about. We’ve got to make it more accessible, that’s why we’re rolling out a 15 per cent pay rise to early educators across the country and a billion-dollar fund to build more, but more important than that, most important of all is making sure that our kids are safe. That’s fundamentally what this has to be all about. And you’re right. There are billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money that are invested in early education centres right across the country, for profit and not for profit, and if they’re not up to scratch, if they’re not meeting the standards to keep our kids safe, then we’ve got to have the power to pull the money.

    LIPSON: If you pull the money, though, doesn’t that just result in those centres closing down, adding more pressure to a system that’s already under strain?

    CLARE: That’s why you’ve got to make sure that these centres meet those standards, and if the threat of money being pulled out means that they lift their standard, then everyone will benefit.

    LIPSON: Do we need a Royal Commission?

    CLARE: We’ve had one. We’ve had a Royal Commission, we’ve had a review into child safety, I commissioned that, as I said, after that paedophile was arrested and convicted in Queensland. We’ve got the recommendations, now we’ve got to implement them.

    In all of the conversations that we’ve been having in the last 24 hours, Dave, it’s not about what do we need to do, it’s how we do it, and that’s what I’ve charged Education Ministers with across the country, to pull all of this together and work on a national plan, a nationwide plan to implement the reforms to help keep our children safe.

    There are things that the states can do on their own, and there are things that we, as a Commonwealth Government, can do, either by implementing legislation like the legislation we’ve talked about today or helping to improve nationwide standards right across the country.

    LIPSON: Jason Clare, thank you so much for your time this morning.

    CLARE: Good on you, thanks mate.  
     

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI USA: SBA Approves Governor Newsom’s Disaster Declaration for State-Sanctioned Crisis in Los Angeles

    Source: United States Small Business Administration

    WASHINGTON – Today, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) announced approval of Governor Gavin Newsom’s long-overdue request for disaster relief in downtown Los Angeles, where he allowed pro-illegal alien riots to harm our brave ICE agents and destroy small businesses in the city. Once again, President Donald J. Trump is saving California from radical leaders who fail to protect their own communities from violent rioters.

    After weeks of no real solutions and inflammatory social media statements, Governor Newsom finally requested federal disaster relief to bail him out – again. President Trump and SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler immediately approved an SBA Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) declaration, enabling small businesses to apply for up to $2 million in low-interest EIDL loans to support working capital and normal operating expenses such as payroll, rent, and utilities that could not be met due to the destruction enabled by Newsom’s failed governance. Unlike Gavin Newsom, the Trump Administration will always put the American people above partisan political stunts.

    “Governor Newsom allowed a mob to rampage Los Angeles – standing with violent rioters, paid protestors, and criminal illegal aliens over law-abiding citizens. Despite an estimated $1 billion in damage, he refused federal relief for weeks, insisting that the riots were peaceful even as small business owners stood in the rubble,” said Loeffler. “Although the SBA has approved California’s disaster relief request and will begin delivering immediate aid to the innocent victims, Governor Newsom must take accountability for his state-sanctioned crisis – and stop playing politics with Americans’ livelihoods.”

    SBA disaster assistance teams are already mobilizing to provide direct on-the-ground support to affected individuals and communities. Impacted individuals seeking to obtain an EIDL loan may visit sba.gov/disaster.

    # # #

    About the U.S. Small Business Administration

    The U.S. Small Business Administration helps power the American dream of entrepreneurship. As the leading voice for small businesses within the federal government, the SBA empowers job creators with the resources and support they need to start, grow, and expand their businesses or recover from a declared disaster. It delivers services through an extensive network of SBA field offices and partnerships with public and private organizations. To learn more, visit www.sba.gov. 

    Related programs: Disaster

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Gosar Introduces Legislation Delisting the Mexican Wolf from the Endangered Species Act

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Paul A Gosar DDS (AZ-04)

    Washington, D.C. — Congressman Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S. (AZ-09), issued the following statement after introducing H.R. 4255, the Enhancing Safety for Animals (ESA) Act, legislation delisting the Mexican wolf from the Endangered Species Act and delinking its populations in the United States and Mexico:

    “Since being reintroduced to the wild in Arizona, Mexican wolves have preyed on cattle, livestock, and even family pets, causing significant financial losses and economic hardship on family-run ranches.

    The Mexican wolf has lingered on the Endangered Species list for nearly 40 years. During that time, there have been numerous accounts of livestock killings and even declines in some big game herds since these wolves were first listed. Much of this can be attributed to failed management by the United States Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS) as the uncontrolled and unmanaged wolf populations have been allowed to roam free. In fact, nearly 90% of the wolf’s original habitat falls within the border of Mexico.  Significant attacks by wolves on cattle, elk, moose, and sheep have occurred and have negatively impacted hunters and ranchers throughout Arizona.

    To make matters worse, the USFWS considers recovery within the borders of Mexico in its management goals. American ranchers are being punished for Mexico’s failure to manage its own animal populations effectively.  Immediate delinking is needed to ensure American ranchers are put first.  

    Unfortunately, lawsuits filed by extremist environmental groups have prevented the Mexican wolf from being delisted nationally, even though the Mexican wolf was released into Arizona and New Mexico as part of an experimental program. 

    The Mexican wolf population has grown steadily since being reintroduced to the wild.  In the U.S., the Mexican wolf population now exceeds the original federal recovery goals for wolves in the wild, with hundreds more in captivity for breeding.  Now a stable population, the wolf is no longer in danger of extinction and should be delisted from the Endangered Species Act,” stated Congressman Gosar.

    “The Mexican wolf is destroying the livelihood of western ranchers by slaughtering their cattle. Because of its status as an endangered species–a falsehood perpetuated by the Biden Administration and environmental groups–ranchers cannot protect their herds from these predators,” added Congressman Andy Biggs (AZ-05). “I’m thankful that Rep. Gosar is leading the effort to allow Arizona ranchers to protect their cattle without fear of repercussions from the federal government. Cattle are a vital part of Arizona’s economy, and Congress must ensure that ranchers are able to protect their herds from dangerous predators.”

    “Now is the time to recognize the catastrophic impact that bad federal policy has on local communities.  For too long, ranchers in states near our southern border have shouldered the burden of managing this species with limited tools and little support from the federal government who has imposed all manners of burdens. Ranchers and rural communities face daily challenges such as livestock predation and threats to community safety due to overpopulated wolf packs. We commend Congressman Gosar for introducing the Enhancing Safety for Animals Act and working to bring some relief to these communities,” said Kaitlynn Glover, Executive Director, Public Lands Council. 

    The 10(J) experimental population listing of the Mexican wolf is one of the clearest examples in the country of ESA abuse by the environmental community and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The federal protections have been misused by activists to control landscapes and land managers, and their rhetoric often contradicts established science. The rapid increase in wolf populations, coupled with these federal protections, has restricted management options for producers, leading to an increase in cattle losses that negatively impact their profitability. I would like to thank Congressman Gosar for introducing the Enhancing Safety for Animals Act that acknowledges the abuse of the ESA with the Mexican wolf listing and seeks to provide relief to U.S. cattle producers,” stated National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Senior Vice President of Government Affairs, Ethan Lane.

    “We applaud Representative Gosar for his leadership on efforts to delist the Mexican wolf,” said John Boelts, President of the Arizona Farm Bureau. “For years, our members have dealt with the devastating effects of the reintroduction of this apex predator. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently reported that the Mexican wolf population in the U.S. has surpassed 280. It’s time to delist the species and provide relief to Arizona’s ranchers and rural communities who have dealt with years of negative impacts and complex regulations. State governments should now be given the opportunity to manage the wolf population directly.”

    Original Cosponsors

    Representatives Biggs (AZ), Boebert, Crane, Hageman, Hamadeh, Hurd, LaMalfa, Stauber, Tiffany, Zinke

    Outside Group Supporters:

    American Farm Bureau Federation, American Lands Council, Arizona Farm Bureau, Arizona Cattle Growers’ Association, Blue River Cowbelles, Catron County Commission, Coalition of Arizona/New Mexico Counties, Cochise-Graham Cattle Growers’ Association, Eastern Arizona Counties Organization, Graham County Chamber of Commerce, Greenlee County Board of Supervisors, Greenlee County Cattle Growers’ Association, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, New Mexico Cattle Growers’ Association, New Mexico Farm and Livestock Bureau, New Mexico Federal Lands Council, Protect Agriculture Now, Public Lands Council, R-CALF USA, Southeaster Arizona Sportsmen Club

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: Origin Investment Corp I Announces Pricing of $60,000,000 Initial Public Offering

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Singapore, July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Origin Investment Corp I (the “Company”), a blank check company, today announced the pricing of its initial public offering (“IPO”) of 6,000,000 units at an offering price of $10.00 per unit, with each unit consisting of one Class A ordinary share and one-half of one redeemable warrant. The units are expected to begin trading on the Nasdaq Global Market (“Nasdaq”) on July 2, 2025 under the ticker symbol “ORIQU”. Each whole warrant entitles the holder thereof to purchase one Class A ordinary share at a price of $11.50 per share, subject to adjustment as described in the prospectus. Only whole warrants are exercisable. The warrants will become exercisable 30 days after the completion of the Company’s initial business combination, and will expire five years after the completion of the Company’s initial business combination or earlier upon redemption or the Company’s liquidation. The offering is expected to close on July 3, 2025, subject to satisfaction of customary closing conditions. Once the securities comprising the units begin separate trading, the Class A ordinary shares and the warrants are expected to be traded on Nasdaq under the symbols “ORIQ” and “ORIQW”, respectively. No fractional warrants will be issued upon separation of the units and only whole warrants will trade. In addition, the Company has granted the underwriters a 45-day option to purchase up to 900,000 additional units at the IPO price to cover over-allotments, if any.

    ThinkEquity is acting as sole book-running manager for the offering.

    A registration statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-284189) relating to the shares was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and became effective on July 1, 2025. This offering is being made only by means of a prospectus. Copies of the final prospectus, when available, may be obtained from ThinkEquity, 17 State Street, 41st Floor, New York, New York 10004. The final prospectus will be filed with the SEC and will be available on the SEC’s website located at http://www.sec.gov.

    This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.

    About Origin Investment Corp I

    The Company is a blank check company, also commonly referred to as a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, formed for the purpose of effecting a merger, share exchange, asset acquisition, stock purchase, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses or entities. While the Company will not limit its search for a target company to any particular business segment, the Company intends to focus its search for a target business in Asia. However, the Company will not consummate its initial business combination with an entity or business in China or with China operations consolidated through a variable interest entity structure.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements,” including with respect to the IPO and search for an initial business combination. No assurance can be given that the IPO will be completed on the terms described above, or at all, or that the net proceeds of the offering will be used as indicated. Forward-looking statements are subject to numerous conditions, many of which are beyond the control of the Company, including those set forth in the Risk Factors section of the Company’s registration statement and preliminary prospectus for the IPO filed with the SEC. Copies are available on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov. The Company undertakes no obligation to update these statements for revisions or changes after the date of this release, except as required by law.

    Contact:

    Edward Chang, CEO
    +65 7825-5768
    eychang@originequity.partners

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Origin Investment Corp I Announces Pricing of $60,000,000 Initial Public Offering

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Singapore, July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Origin Investment Corp I (the “Company”), a blank check company, today announced the pricing of its initial public offering (“IPO”) of 6,000,000 units at an offering price of $10.00 per unit, with each unit consisting of one Class A ordinary share and one-half of one redeemable warrant. The units are expected to begin trading on the Nasdaq Global Market (“Nasdaq”) on July 2, 2025 under the ticker symbol “ORIQU”. Each whole warrant entitles the holder thereof to purchase one Class A ordinary share at a price of $11.50 per share, subject to adjustment as described in the prospectus. Only whole warrants are exercisable. The warrants will become exercisable 30 days after the completion of the Company’s initial business combination, and will expire five years after the completion of the Company’s initial business combination or earlier upon redemption or the Company’s liquidation. The offering is expected to close on July 3, 2025, subject to satisfaction of customary closing conditions. Once the securities comprising the units begin separate trading, the Class A ordinary shares and the warrants are expected to be traded on Nasdaq under the symbols “ORIQ” and “ORIQW”, respectively. No fractional warrants will be issued upon separation of the units and only whole warrants will trade. In addition, the Company has granted the underwriters a 45-day option to purchase up to 900,000 additional units at the IPO price to cover over-allotments, if any.

    ThinkEquity is acting as sole book-running manager for the offering.

    A registration statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-284189) relating to the shares was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and became effective on July 1, 2025. This offering is being made only by means of a prospectus. Copies of the final prospectus, when available, may be obtained from ThinkEquity, 17 State Street, 41st Floor, New York, New York 10004. The final prospectus will be filed with the SEC and will be available on the SEC’s website located at http://www.sec.gov.

    This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any state or jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such state or jurisdiction.

    About Origin Investment Corp I

    The Company is a blank check company, also commonly referred to as a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, formed for the purpose of effecting a merger, share exchange, asset acquisition, stock purchase, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses or entities. While the Company will not limit its search for a target company to any particular business segment, the Company intends to focus its search for a target business in Asia. However, the Company will not consummate its initial business combination with an entity or business in China or with China operations consolidated through a variable interest entity structure.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains statements that constitute “forward-looking statements,” including with respect to the IPO and search for an initial business combination. No assurance can be given that the IPO will be completed on the terms described above, or at all, or that the net proceeds of the offering will be used as indicated. Forward-looking statements are subject to numerous conditions, many of which are beyond the control of the Company, including those set forth in the Risk Factors section of the Company’s registration statement and preliminary prospectus for the IPO filed with the SEC. Copies are available on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov. The Company undertakes no obligation to update these statements for revisions or changes after the date of this release, except as required by law.

    Contact:

    Edward Chang, CEO
    +65 7825-5768
    eychang@originequity.partners

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Qatar Affirms Commitment to Enhancing Partnership for Inclusive Development

    Source: Government of Qatar

    Seville, July 02, 2025

    The State of Qatar reaffirmed its commitment to fostering partnerships and mobilizing financing for inclusive development, expressing pride in hosting the Second Global Summit on Social Development this coming November. 

    The summit aims to enhance global dialogue and action toward inclusive social development and achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

    This message was delivered by HE Minister of State for International Cooperation Maryam bint Ali bin Nasser Al Misnad on financing inclusive and sustainable development. The session was co-organized by the State of Qatar and the Kingdom of Spain in cooperation with the International Labour Organization (ILO), as part of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville.

    HE the minister emphasized that achieving the SDGs requires effective international cooperation, especially to support vulnerable populations affected by poverty, conflict, and climate change. Her Excellency stressed the urgent need for strong partnerships and sustained investment in education, healthcare, and social protection. She added that a real commitment is needed to leaving no one behind, with special attention to women, children, the elderly, and persons with disabilities.

    Her Excellency underscored that the State of Qatar continues to pursue its Vision 2030 by building a knowledge-based economy driven by innovation, social justice, and inclusion. She highlighted that sustainable development indicators are being integrated into all national policies, with a strong emphasis on the family and expanding access to quality education and healthcare.

    At the international level, HE the minister reiterated the State of Qatar’s commitment to working closely with UN agencies, particularly the UN Development Programme (UNDP), and to investing in development acceleration labs that support local innovation in over 115 countries. She also noted the State of Qatar’s role in supporting education in emergencies, including a new partnership with the World Bank that converts debt relief into social investment.

    Commenting on the broader global agenda, Her Excellency said that the State of Qatar views the Seville Commitment as a vital stepping stone to the upcoming Doha Summit. She called for joint efforts to reform global financing mechanisms and to strengthen collaboration with international financial institutions like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and development banks. Her Excellency also called for ensuring that human rights remain at the heart of all development efforts, adding that the State of Qatar looks forward to having everyone work together, in a spirit of partnership and innovation, to develop real solutions that reach those most in need. 

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Scott Applauds Passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for South Carolina Tim Scott

    WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-S.C.) released the following statement upon passage of the Senate reconciliation legislation, otherwise known as President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill. This vital and comprehensive reconciliation legislation will produce lasting positive change for the American people through governmental fiscal responsibility, tax cuts, immigration enforcement, and investment in essential sectors of the country’s economy.

    “Results delivered! We’re one step closer to history because Senate Republicans got the job done,” said Senator Scott. “When President Donald J. Trump signs this bill into law, it will be a major success for hardworking American families. We’re delivering tax cuts for families, securing the border, strengthening our national defense, and unleashing American energy dominance. This is a win for Americans chasing opportunity, building prosperity, and fighting for their shot at the American Dream.”

    Senator Scott successfully championed several important provisions in this legislation that will provide economic relief, support small businesses, promote tax fairness, and strengthen various industries. These legislative victories underscore Senator Scott’s unwavering dedication to advancing the interests of the people of South Carolina and the United States.

    Below is a list of key provisions championed by Senator Scott: 

    • The Opportunity Zone Program is now permanent and greatly expanded, paving the way for economic investment and growth in economically distressed areas and maximizing community impact.
    • A permanent school choice tax credit that will benefit millions of middle and low-income children for generations.
    • Coaches and athletic staff can now claim out-of-pocket job-related expenses on their taxes just like classroom teachers.
    • Existing FICA Tax credits have been expanded to cover additional businesses, providing meaningful tax relief for small beauty and grooming establishments.
    • New Market Tax Credit has been permanently extended to attract private capital for projects in underserved urban and rural areas. 
    • The permanent extension of the Excess Business Loss Limitation Section 461(I) to safeguard the tax base and prevent aggressive tax sheltering.
    • The removal of retaliatory tax Section 899 to secure local employment and investment from foreign-owned U.S. businesses.
    • Removal of restrictions allowing employers and employees to contribute towards the fees of direct primary care programs. 

    South Carolina specific provisions can be found below:

    • Extension of critical support for South Carolina Farmers; providing stronger price protections, disaster aid, and new insurance tools. 
    • Extension of the 45X production credit to support the growing EV and lithium sector in the state.
    • Preservation of the tax credits vital for the state’s nuclear industry and eligibility for advanced nuclear technologies, promoting clean energy and economic growth. 
    • Protection of the duty drawback program, supporting small and medium-sized tobacco farmers. 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: ‘Innovator passports’ set to accelerate cutting-edge NHS care

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    ‘Innovator passports’ set to accelerate cutting-edge NHS care

    New ‘innovator passport’ will slash red tape so cutting-edge tech can be rolled out across the NHS quicker under the 10 Year Health Plan.

    • Digital system will mean companies can innovate faster and patients can get pioneering tech as soon as it’s ready to be rolled out
    • Will provide major boost to the Life Sciences sector, creating an NHS fit for future under the Plan for Change

    NHS patients across the country will get accelerated access to cutting edge technology through a new digital system that will cut red tape and boost life science .

    A new ‘innovator passport’ – to be introduced over next two years – will allow new technology that has been robustly assessed by one NHS organisation to be easily rolled out to others. 

    The move is a key part of the government’s Plan for Change and its 10 Year Health Plan, which will transfer power to patients and transform how healthcare is delivered, creating an NHS fit for future.

    For too long, cutting edge businesses deserted working with the NHS and went elsewhere, weighed down by slow timelines and reams of processes. Now, organisations will be able to join up with the NHS quicker than ever before through the removal of needless bureaucracy. Not only is this better for patients, but also for our NHS and economic growth.

    A ‘one-stop-shop’ thorough check from the NHS will now allow businesses to get to work as quickly as possible and deliver on what matters most to patients across the country. It means NHS patients will get more effective treatments and support quicker, and the NHS will make the most of its finite assessment resource, all while businesses are given a boost through the government’s industrial strategy.

    Treatments including special wound dressings—already reducing surgical site infections by 38% at Barking, Havering & Redbridge University Hospitals—could be adopted more widely, benefiting patients across the country.

    At Barts Health Trust in London, the use of antimicrobial protective coverings for cardiac devices cut infections and saved over £103,000 per year. At University Hospitals Dorset, adopting rapid influenza testing reduced bed days and antibiotic use, freeing up vital resources. MedTech Compass will make these innovations, and the evidence underpinning them, clear to buyers within the NHS.

    The new passport will eliminate multiple compliance assessments, reducing duplication across the health service. It will be delivered through MedTech Compass, a digital platform developed by DHSC to make effective technologies more visible and widely available.

    The initiative builds on the government’s drive to slash waiting lists and ensure people have access to health and care when and where they need it under the Plan for Change.

    Wes Streeting, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, said: 

    For too long, Britain’s leading scientific minds have been held back by needless admin that means suppliers are repeatedly asked for the same data in different formats by different trusts – this is bad for the NHS, patients and bad for business. 

    These innovator passports will save time and reduce duplication, meaning our life sciences sector – a central part of our 10 Year Health Plan – can work hand in hand with the health service and make Britain a powerhouse for medical technology.

    Frustrated patients will no longer have to face a postcode lottery for lifesaving products to be introduced in their area and companies will be able to get their technology used across the NHS more easily, creating a health service fit for future under the Plan for Change.

    Dr Vin Diwakar, Clinical Transformation Director at NHS England, said:

    We’re seeing the impact improvements to technology are having on our everyday lives on everything from smartwatches to fitness trackers – and we want to make sure NHS patients can benefit from the latest medical technology and innovations as well.

    The new innovator passports will speed up the roll-out of new health technology in the NHS which has been proven to be effective, so that patients can benefit from new treatments much sooner.

    It also forms an important element of the industrial strategy through the upcoming Life Sciences Sector Plan, which will turbocharge Britain’s life sciences sector and cement the UK’s position as a global innovation leader.

    MedTech Compass helps speed up decision-making in trusts, allowing technology to scale faster – making it easier for trusts across the country to find, assess, and adopt proven technologies that improve and speed up patient care.

    The passports mean that once a healthcare tool has been assessed by one NHS organisation, further NHS organisations will not be able to insist on repeated assessments, reducing the need for local NHS systems to spend their limited resources on bureaucratic processes that have already been completed elsewhere.
    The digital system will act as a dynamic best buyer’s guide, making it easier for trusts to compare products side-by-side in one place.

    Updates to this page

    Published 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Security: Coast Guard, National Park Service teams up to rescue mariner

    Source: United States Coast Guard

    07/01/2025 06:52 PM EDT

    The Coast Guard and the National Park Service rescued a mariner after his vessel ran aground near Shackleford Banks, North Carolina, Monday night. 

    For more information follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Banking: Industry Consultation on the Future of the Account-to-Account Payments System

    Source: Reserve Bank of Australia

    The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and The Treasury welcome the release of a public consultation today by Australian Payments Network and Australian Payments Plus on the future of the account-to-account payments system.

    Formulating a clear vision for the account-to-account payments system that is consistent with public interest considerations is a foundational recommendation of the recent RBA Risk Assessment on the proposed decommissioning of the Bulk Electronic Clearing System.

    RBA Assistant Governor (Financial System) Brad Jones said: “The account-to-account system supports consumers, businesses and government agencies in their everyday economic activities. It is a vital part of Australia’s financial infrastructure. This consultation provides a broad range of stakeholders the chance to provide input into how the system can be modernised to meet the opportunities and challenges of the future, in the public interest.”

    To support the development of the vision, the RBA is publishing a paper outlining our public interest framework for the account-to-account payments system. Central to the success of the future system is its ability to provide all end users with access to payments options that are capable of meeting their needs, and that are cost-effective, reliable and safe. Achievement of these objectives will require effective industry governance arrangements, resilient infrastructure and competition and innovation among participants.

    Background

    Australian Payments Network (AusPayNet) is the self-regulatory body for the payments industry. It administers the framework for the Bulk Electronic Clearing System – Australia’s system for processing batch account-to-account payments, including payroll and welfare payments.

    Australian Payments Plus (AP+) is the provider of Australia’s fast payment system – the New Payments Platform – as well as the BPAY billing service.

    The consultation paper, and details about the submission process, can be accessed at either of the following locations:

    www.auspaynet.com.au/insights/consultations/A2Avision

    www.auspayplus.com.au/stakeholder-engagement/public-consultations

    MIL OSI Global Banks

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Hundreds of thousands to get secure roof over their heads

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    Hundreds of thousands to get secure roof over their heads

    Government sets out ambitions for a social rent revolution through the new £39 billion Social and Affordable Homes Programme.

    • Boost for families as plans are set out to transform housing over the next 10 years, with more social and affordable properties including council homes, building on our Plan for Change
    • Government sets ambition to deliver around 300,000 social and affordable homes through the new £39bn Social and Affordable Homes Programme, with at least 60% for social rent
    • Long-term certainty and stability for the sector delivered through Deputy PM’s five step plan, while standards for millions driven up
    • Major intervention package will drive the government’s Plan for Change mission to build 1.5 million homes and deliver the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation

    Hundreds of thousands of social and affordable homes, including 60 per cent for social rent, will be built and standards will be driven up under plans by the Deputy Prime Minister to usher in a decade of housing renewal across the country.  

    This significant package of renewal will help deliver on our Plan for Change, unlock new jobs and turn the tide of the entrenched housing crisis, which has seen families and over 165,000 children stuck in temporary accommodation without the safe, secure and stable home they deserve.  

    That’s why the government is today setting an ambition to deliver around 300,000 new social and affordable homes, through the unprecedented £39 billion new Social and Affordable Homes Programme announced at the Spending Review. Through this, we are setting an ambitious target that at least 60% of homes will be for social rent which is linked to local incomes – achieving this would mean delivering around 180,000 homes for social rent. That is six times more than the decade up to 2024.  

    Alongside this, a long-term plan – Delivering a Decade of Renewal for Social and Affordable Housing – is being published today (Wednesday) to set out how the government will deliver the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation, alongside driving up the safety and quality of homes.  

    Living standards for millions of social housing tenants will also be driven up under new plans to update and modernise the Decent Homes Standard, which will be extended to privately rented homes for the first time, and Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards will be implemented for the first time in the social housing sector.  

    Further measures set out in the plan includes transformative changes to Right to Buy and other measures to protect vital council housing stock, unlocking investment in new and existing social housing, and increasing overall standards alongside a rallying call for the sector to step up and deliver.  

    This significant package is the latest action the government is taking to deliver on the Plan for Change to build 1.5 million homes and drive-up living standards, which includes reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework, the landmark Planning and Infrastructure Bill and the recent announcement of a new publicly-owned National Housing Bank. This will further help to turn the tide on the housing crisis which has left over 165,000 children in temporary accommodation and locked a generation out of a secure home.

    Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary Angela Rayner said:

    “We are seizing this golden opportunity with both hands to transform this country by building the social and affordable homes we need, so we create a brighter future where families aren’t trapped in temporary accommodation and young people are no longer locked out of a secure home.   

    “With investment and reform, this government is delivering the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation, unleashing a social rent revolution, and embarking on a decade of renewal for social and affordable housing in this country.   

    “That’s why I am urging everyone in the social housing sector to step forward with us now to make this vision a reality, to work together to turn the tide on the housing crisis together and deliver the homes and living standards people deserve through our Plan for Change.”

    Since coming into office, the government has listened carefully to social housing providers and tenants. The new plan, published by the government today, reflects this engagement and builds on the investment strategy laid out at the Spending Review. 

    The five steps form the government’s plan to deliver the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation, alongside a lasting change in the safety and quality of homes. 

    Each step builds on work already undertaken to bring stability to the sector, but the Plan also publicly signals to developers, councils, investors and to the public the government’s serious intent and ambition for social and affordable housing. It also gives providers the stability and certainty they need to be able to borrow and invest in both new and existing homes knowing the government has a comprehensive plan for the sector.

    The five steps are to:     

    1. Deliver the biggest boost to grant funding in a generation
    2. Rebuild the sector’s capacity to borrow and invest in new and existing supply
    3. Establish an effective and stable regulatory regime
    4. Reinvigorate council housebuilding
    5. Forge a renewed partnership with the sector to build at scale

    To deliver the housing the country needs, the government confirmed at the Spending Review a new 10-year £39 billion programme to kickstart building at scale.   

    Homes England – the government’s housing and regeneration agency – will be responsible for delivering the majority of the funding, with up to 30% of funding  – up to £11.7bn over the 10 years – being used to support housing delivery from the Greater London Authority in the capital.     

    The long-term nature of the Social and Affordable Homes Programme will also offer more certainty for developers to invest and effectively plan housebuilding for the future, compared to the previous five-year £12.3bn 2021-2026 Affordable Homes Programme.   

    The last five year 2021-26 programme averaged £2.3 billion per year – this means the government will be spending almost double this on affordable housing investment by the end of this Parliament (£4bn in 2029/30).  

    To achieve the ambition of delivering more social and affordable housing, the government is issuing a ‘call to arms’ to everyone with a role in social and affordable housing to prove they can deliver at scale and at pace. And as part of this effort, we will work with the sector in the coming months to agree a joint overall target on how many social and affordable homes can be delivered overall.  

    A new long-term 10-year settlement for social housing rents will be introduced from April 2026 to provide the social housing sector with the certainty they need to reinvest in existing and new housing stock.     

    The government is also publishing a consultation on how to implement a convergence measure, with options for this being capped at £1 or £2 per week– with a final decision to follow at this year’s Autumn Budget.    

    Further views will be sought on a new Decent Homes Standard which will modernise the standard, with proposals that hold tenant safety at their core but remain proportionate and affordable for providers to deliver. Views will also be sought on updating standards to make sure homes are warm and efficient through a Minimum Energy Efficiency Standard for the social rented sector. This is all alongside our work to implement Awaab’s Law – this government is prioritising safety as a first step.    

    The government has also set out a package of wider reforms to the Right to Buy scheme to protect vital housing stock and to enable councils to ramp up delivery of new homes. This follows the reduction in maximum cash discounts that was implemented in November 2024.    

    This package complements work already taking place to get Britain building including through the updated National Planning Policy Framework, the landmark Planning and Infrastructure Bill and a new National Housing Bank to get more spades in the ground.

    Minister for Energy Consumers Miatta Fahnbulleh said:

    “Everyone deserves to live in a warm, secure and affordable home, which is why we are setting out bold plans today to transform housing over the next decade.

    “This includes proposals to introduce an energy efficiency standard for social housing for the first time ever, helping tenants benefit from cheaper energy bills and more efficient homes.”

    Further information

    Using Live Table 1012 in Published MHCLG statistics,(Live_Table_1012.ods) the number of social rent completions funded by Homes England and the GLA between 2014-15 and 2023-24 was 28,634.

    Updates to this page

    Published 2 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Industry Consultation on the Future of the Account-to-Account Payments System

    Source: Airservices Australia

    The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) and The Treasury welcome the release of a public consultation today by Australian Payments Network and Australian Payments Plus on the future of the account-to-account payments system.

    Formulating a clear vision for the account-to-account payments system that is consistent with public interest considerations is a foundational recommendation of the recent RBA Risk Assessment on the proposed decommissioning of the Bulk Electronic Clearing System.

    RBA Assistant Governor (Financial System) Brad Jones said: “The account-to-account system supports consumers, businesses and government agencies in their everyday economic activities. It is a vital part of Australia’s financial infrastructure. This consultation provides a broad range of stakeholders the chance to provide input into how the system can be modernised to meet the opportunities and challenges of the future, in the public interest.”

    To support the development of the vision, the RBA is publishing a paper outlining our public interest framework for the account-to-account payments system. Central to the success of the future system is its ability to provide all end users with access to payments options that are capable of meeting their needs, and that are cost-effective, reliable and safe. Achievement of these objectives will require effective industry governance arrangements, resilient infrastructure and competition and innovation among participants.

    Background

    Australian Payments Network (AusPayNet) is the self-regulatory body for the payments industry. It administers the framework for the Bulk Electronic Clearing System – Australia’s system for processing batch account-to-account payments, including payroll and welfare payments.

    Australian Payments Plus (AP+) is the provider of Australia’s fast payment system – the New Payments Platform – as well as the BPAY billing service.

    The consultation paper, and details about the submission process, can be accessed at either of the following locations:

    www.auspaynet.com.au/insights/consultations/A2Avision

    www.auspayplus.com.au/stakeholder-engagement/public-consultations

    MIL OSI News

  • MIL-OSI: BitMart Research—Reframing the On-Chain Narrative: What New Story Is Base Telling?

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Mahe, Seychelles, July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — BitMart Research, the research arm of BitMart Exchange, has released a comprehensive analysis on the resurgence of the Base ecosystem, highlighting its explosive growth, evolving narratives, and rising institutional alignment. As daily active addresses, TVL, and transaction volumes reach new highs, Base is rapidly transitioning from a speculative L2 to a foundational layer for compliant, on-chain financial and content infrastructure. With support from Coinbase’s strategic initiatives and breakout projects like Virtual and Kaito redefining launch dynamics and the attention economy, Base is emerging as a pivotal force in bridging traditional finance and Web3 innovation.

    1. Recent Developments in the Base Ecosystem

    Since the end of May 2025, Base has entered a clear period of ecological “explosion.” Key metrics such as daily active addresses, total value locked (TVL), and daily transaction count have surged significantly. The main driver behind this explosive growth is the emergence of multiple trending narratives within the Base ecosystem, each generating waves of market hype and drawing substantial attention.

    From a macro perspective, the recent IPO of Circle has sparked renewed investor optimism around the concept of stablecoins in global equity markets. This optimism, especially amid expectations of a more favorable regulatory environment, has positioned Base as an increasingly attractive option for traditional institutions.

    • User Growth: The number of active addresses has grown exponentially, recently hitting a record high of 3.6 million.
    • TVL Surge: Base’s total value locked climbed from $2.8 billion in early May to a peak of nearly $4 billion, matching its bull market highs in 2024.
    • On-Chain Activity: Since May, daily on-chain transactions have averaged nearly 9 million, reaching the peak levels of the 2024 bull cycle.

    2. Trending Projects in the Base Ecosystem


    Virtual: Pump.fun + Bn Alpha-Style Launch Mechanism Sparks Market Frenzy

    Among the many trending projects in the Base ecosystem, Virtual has undoubtedly become one of the most closely watched by the market. Leveraging an innovative token launch mechanism, it has rapidly attracted a large influx of capital and users, emerging as the flagship project in Base’s ongoing “launch narrative.” The price of VIRTUAL rose from $0.50 in mid-April to a peak of $2.50 in early June—a 400% gain.

    The key advantages of Virtual’s launch model include:

    • Ultra-low fundraising price: Each new project raises funding based on a fixed valuation of 42,425 VIRTUAL (approximately $224,000), allowing users to participate at extremely low entry prices. This creates substantial profit potential once the token goes live.
    • Linear token vesting: Unlike MEME launches on Pump.fun, tokens in Virtual’s launchpad projects are not fully unlocked at listing. Instead, they follow a transparent vesting model similar to VC-backed tokens, with tokens released in tranches. Moreover, to prevent immediate sell-offs by project teams, all raised funds are injected directly into the initial liquidity pool rather than handed over to the team.
    • Low participation risk: If a launch fails to meet its fundraising target, users receive a full refund. Additionally, Virtual only features a few new launches per day, meaning the overall project quality tends to be higher than most MEME tokens—making user participation relatively low-risk.
    • Reduced rug-pull potential: Virtual imposes a 1% trading fee, 70% of which is returned to the project team. This incentivizes teams to focus on increasing trading volume rather than cashing out quickly, creating a more sustainable ecosystem loop.

    However, as the platform gained popularity, early users frequently adopted a strategy of selling immediately after token launch to capture short-term gains. This behavior led to heavy selling pressure on new projects, undermining overall ecosystem stability. In response, Virtual introduced a “Green Lock” mechanism in mid-June, imposing a mandatory lock-up period on token allocations for launch participants. During this period, users are prohibited from selling their tokens; violating this rule results in a suspension of points accumulation.

    While this mechanism helps curb early dumping and extends project lifespans, it also significantly alters the speculative logic that drove initial enthusiasm. Users now face longer profit cycles and lower capital efficiency, leading to a temporary cooling of market sentiment. Since mid-June, the price of VIRTUAL has entered a downward trend, falling from its peak to $1.69—a decline of over 37%.

    Kaito: The Leading Project in the Attention Economy

    Kaito stands as the leading project in the emerging “Information Finance” (InfoFi) sector. Since May, its token price has surged from $0.79 to a peak of $2.41, marking an increase of nearly 205%.

    At the core of Kaito’s appeal is its Yaps module, which tokenizes user attention by rewarding those who post content on X (formerly Twitter). By incentivizing high-quality content creation around trending projects—such as Berachain, Monad, and Initia—Kaito has built a Web3-native content-driven influence model. This mechanism has significantly boosted community engagement. Coupled with weekly airdrops and leaderboard rewards, users are empowered to both “speak” and “monetize,” attracting a growing number of content creators and thought leaders. This dynamic has played a key role in driving the growth of social and narrative-driven content on the Base network.

    3. Coinbase and the Future Trajectory of Base

    In June 2025, the U.S. Senate passed the GENIUS Stablecoin Act, establishing a formal legal framework for USD-backed stablecoins. This marked the first time that regulatory authorities legally recognized digital assets’ compliance status. Against this backdrop, Coinbase, as a fully compliant U.S.-based exchange, has launched a three-pronged strategic layout around Base:

    1. Enabling Regulated On-Chain Asset Access — Bridging Coinbase Balances to Base

    Coinbase is currently deepening the integration between its centralized trading platform and the Base chain. It has rolled out the Verified Pools feature, allowing KYC-verified users to interact directly with Base dApps using their Coinbase account balances—eliminating the need to switch wallets or perform manual on-chain transfers.

    Uniswap and Aerodrome have already been announced as the primary DEXs supporting this integration. Although the feature remains in its early stages, it aligns with the broader trend of centralized exchanges moving toward on-chain/off-chain convergence.

    2. Building a Compliant Stablecoin Ecosystem with Traditional Finance — Tokenizing Fiat On-Chain

    Following the establishment of an access gateway, Coinbase has partnered with Wall Street giants—including JPMorgan Chase—to pilot the issuance of compliant stablecoins and deposit tokens (e.g., JPMD) on Base. These assets are fully custodied by regulated banks and come with traditional financial benefits such as interest accrual, legal protections, and deposit insurance.

    This initiative goes beyond simply putting USD on-chain—it represents the digitization of traditional financial system infrastructure, positioning Base as a core ledger layer for real-world finance in the Web3 ecosystem.

    3. Building a Diverse On-Chain Ecosystem — Creating Real Use Cases for On-Chain Dollars

    To strengthen actual demand for on-chain USD, Coinbase is simultaneously expanding the Base ecosystem with a wide array of applications:

    • On-Chain U.S. Stock Trading: Coinbase is seeking SEC approval to tokenize U.S. equities, planning to launch products that allow trading of Apple, Tesla, and other stocks directly on-chain—removing geographical barriers from traditional markets.
    • Collaboration with Circle: The launch of Circle Payments Network (CPN) provides USDC with robust clearing infrastructure. As the leading stablecoin on Base, USDC will support DeFi, RWA, and cross-border payment applications—positioning Base as a key hub for compliant blockchain finance.
    • Global Crypto Payments: Coinbase is working with Shopify and Stripe to integrate USDC into e-commerce checkout systems, expanding the real-world use of stablecoins in cross-border settlements.
    • Compliant DeFi and On-Chain Lending: Protocols such as Aerodrome, Uniswap, and Spark are being guided toward KYC-enabled, compliant operations, offering secure and auditable services in trading and lending for both institutions and retail users.
    • AI Agents and InfoFi Applications: New on-chain innovations like AI Agents and attention economy platforms (e.g., Kaito) are being explored to attract traditional users into emerging crypto-native interaction models.

    Through this multi-layered strategy, Coinbase is not only building a regulated on-chain asset highway, but also constructing a value loop for USD stablecoins—from fiat onboarding and token issuance to liquidity, circulation, and real-world application.

    High-Potential Projects in the Base Ecosystem

    • Aerodrome: As the flagship DEX on Base and a key partner in Coinbase’s integration plan, Aerodrome is well-positioned to benefit from stable institutional liquidity flows. This will likely boost trading volume, TVL, and protocol revenues. Holders of AERO tokens stand to gain from enhanced fee-sharing and staking yields, reinforcing user participation in governance.
    • Uniswap: Similarly, Uniswap—another DEX integrated by Coinbase—will gain increased on-chain liquidity and potential platform revenue, thereby enhancing the value proposition of its UNI token.
    • Keeta: A high-performance RWA-focused chain claiming millions of TPS and sub-second confirmation times. Backed by investors including former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Keeta has already validated its performance through independent stress testing. Despite significant token price corrections, it is expected to collaborate with Base on compliant RWA integration.
    • Creator Bid: In partnership with Kaito, Creator Bid launched version 2.0 with new features such as staking-based launches, increasing user engagement and expanding creator economy models. The platform’s BID token recently reached a historical market cap of $150 million, showing early signs of traction. Similar to Virtual’s early-stage momentum, Creator Bid is poised for continued growth as it iterates.
    • Upside: The first socially driven prediction market on Base. Users can tokenize X/Twitter posts, articles, and videos, and use USDC to vote and trade on them. Currently in its second test season with ~20,000 followers on X, the platform has not yet issued a token, but its unique blend of prediction and content mechanics gives it strong potential to become a liquid and narrative-rich application on Base.

    Conclusion

    Base is undergoing a transformation—from being merely a “high-activity trading L2” into a structurally complete financial and content infrastructure on-chain. From innovation-driven projects like Virtual and Kaito, to Coinbase’s efforts in building a robust USD-denominated ecosystem, the narrative of Base is evolving.

    While short-term hype cycles may cool and speculative behaviors persist, Base’s long-term strength lies in its consistent storytelling and institutional alignment. It is increasingly poised to serve as a bridge between traditional capital and Web3, making it not just a rotating narrative hotspot, but a vital reference point for tracking the crypto industry’s broader shift toward compliance, financialization, and utility.

    About BitMart

    BitMart is a premier global digital asset trading platform with more than 10 million users worldwide. Consistently ranked among the top crypto exchanges on CoinGecko, BitMart offers over 1,700 trading pairs with competitive fees. Committed to continuous innovation and financial inclusivity, BitMart empowers users globally to trade seamlessly. Learn more about BitMart at Website, follow their X (Twitter), or join their Telegram for updates, news, and promotions. Download BitMart App to trade anytime, anywhere.

    Risk Warning:

    The information provided is for reference only and should not be considered a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any financial asset. All information is provided in good faith. However, we make no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability or completeness of such information.

    All cryptocurrency investments (including returns) are highly speculative in nature and involve significant risk of loss. Past, hypothetical or simulated performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. The value of digital currencies may rise or fall, and there may be significant risks in buying, selling, holding or trading digital currencies. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital currencies is suitable for you based on your personal investment objectives, financial situation and risk tolerance. BitMart does not provide any investment, legal or tax advice.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: BitMart Research—Reframing the On-Chain Narrative: What New Story Is Base Telling?

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Mahe, Seychelles, July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — BitMart Research, the research arm of BitMart Exchange, has released a comprehensive analysis on the resurgence of the Base ecosystem, highlighting its explosive growth, evolving narratives, and rising institutional alignment. As daily active addresses, TVL, and transaction volumes reach new highs, Base is rapidly transitioning from a speculative L2 to a foundational layer for compliant, on-chain financial and content infrastructure. With support from Coinbase’s strategic initiatives and breakout projects like Virtual and Kaito redefining launch dynamics and the attention economy, Base is emerging as a pivotal force in bridging traditional finance and Web3 innovation.

    1. Recent Developments in the Base Ecosystem

    Since the end of May 2025, Base has entered a clear period of ecological “explosion.” Key metrics such as daily active addresses, total value locked (TVL), and daily transaction count have surged significantly. The main driver behind this explosive growth is the emergence of multiple trending narratives within the Base ecosystem, each generating waves of market hype and drawing substantial attention.

    From a macro perspective, the recent IPO of Circle has sparked renewed investor optimism around the concept of stablecoins in global equity markets. This optimism, especially amid expectations of a more favorable regulatory environment, has positioned Base as an increasingly attractive option for traditional institutions.

    • User Growth: The number of active addresses has grown exponentially, recently hitting a record high of 3.6 million.
    • TVL Surge: Base’s total value locked climbed from $2.8 billion in early May to a peak of nearly $4 billion, matching its bull market highs in 2024.
    • On-Chain Activity: Since May, daily on-chain transactions have averaged nearly 9 million, reaching the peak levels of the 2024 bull cycle.

    2. Trending Projects in the Base Ecosystem


    Virtual: Pump.fun + Bn Alpha-Style Launch Mechanism Sparks Market Frenzy

    Among the many trending projects in the Base ecosystem, Virtual has undoubtedly become one of the most closely watched by the market. Leveraging an innovative token launch mechanism, it has rapidly attracted a large influx of capital and users, emerging as the flagship project in Base’s ongoing “launch narrative.” The price of VIRTUAL rose from $0.50 in mid-April to a peak of $2.50 in early June—a 400% gain.

    The key advantages of Virtual’s launch model include:

    • Ultra-low fundraising price: Each new project raises funding based on a fixed valuation of 42,425 VIRTUAL (approximately $224,000), allowing users to participate at extremely low entry prices. This creates substantial profit potential once the token goes live.
    • Linear token vesting: Unlike MEME launches on Pump.fun, tokens in Virtual’s launchpad projects are not fully unlocked at listing. Instead, they follow a transparent vesting model similar to VC-backed tokens, with tokens released in tranches. Moreover, to prevent immediate sell-offs by project teams, all raised funds are injected directly into the initial liquidity pool rather than handed over to the team.
    • Low participation risk: If a launch fails to meet its fundraising target, users receive a full refund. Additionally, Virtual only features a few new launches per day, meaning the overall project quality tends to be higher than most MEME tokens—making user participation relatively low-risk.
    • Reduced rug-pull potential: Virtual imposes a 1% trading fee, 70% of which is returned to the project team. This incentivizes teams to focus on increasing trading volume rather than cashing out quickly, creating a more sustainable ecosystem loop.

    However, as the platform gained popularity, early users frequently adopted a strategy of selling immediately after token launch to capture short-term gains. This behavior led to heavy selling pressure on new projects, undermining overall ecosystem stability. In response, Virtual introduced a “Green Lock” mechanism in mid-June, imposing a mandatory lock-up period on token allocations for launch participants. During this period, users are prohibited from selling their tokens; violating this rule results in a suspension of points accumulation.

    While this mechanism helps curb early dumping and extends project lifespans, it also significantly alters the speculative logic that drove initial enthusiasm. Users now face longer profit cycles and lower capital efficiency, leading to a temporary cooling of market sentiment. Since mid-June, the price of VIRTUAL has entered a downward trend, falling from its peak to $1.69—a decline of over 37%.

    Kaito: The Leading Project in the Attention Economy

    Kaito stands as the leading project in the emerging “Information Finance” (InfoFi) sector. Since May, its token price has surged from $0.79 to a peak of $2.41, marking an increase of nearly 205%.

    At the core of Kaito’s appeal is its Yaps module, which tokenizes user attention by rewarding those who post content on X (formerly Twitter). By incentivizing high-quality content creation around trending projects—such as Berachain, Monad, and Initia—Kaito has built a Web3-native content-driven influence model. This mechanism has significantly boosted community engagement. Coupled with weekly airdrops and leaderboard rewards, users are empowered to both “speak” and “monetize,” attracting a growing number of content creators and thought leaders. This dynamic has played a key role in driving the growth of social and narrative-driven content on the Base network.

    3. Coinbase and the Future Trajectory of Base

    In June 2025, the U.S. Senate passed the GENIUS Stablecoin Act, establishing a formal legal framework for USD-backed stablecoins. This marked the first time that regulatory authorities legally recognized digital assets’ compliance status. Against this backdrop, Coinbase, as a fully compliant U.S.-based exchange, has launched a three-pronged strategic layout around Base:

    1. Enabling Regulated On-Chain Asset Access — Bridging Coinbase Balances to Base

    Coinbase is currently deepening the integration between its centralized trading platform and the Base chain. It has rolled out the Verified Pools feature, allowing KYC-verified users to interact directly with Base dApps using their Coinbase account balances—eliminating the need to switch wallets or perform manual on-chain transfers.

    Uniswap and Aerodrome have already been announced as the primary DEXs supporting this integration. Although the feature remains in its early stages, it aligns with the broader trend of centralized exchanges moving toward on-chain/off-chain convergence.

    2. Building a Compliant Stablecoin Ecosystem with Traditional Finance — Tokenizing Fiat On-Chain

    Following the establishment of an access gateway, Coinbase has partnered with Wall Street giants—including JPMorgan Chase—to pilot the issuance of compliant stablecoins and deposit tokens (e.g., JPMD) on Base. These assets are fully custodied by regulated banks and come with traditional financial benefits such as interest accrual, legal protections, and deposit insurance.

    This initiative goes beyond simply putting USD on-chain—it represents the digitization of traditional financial system infrastructure, positioning Base as a core ledger layer for real-world finance in the Web3 ecosystem.

    3. Building a Diverse On-Chain Ecosystem — Creating Real Use Cases for On-Chain Dollars

    To strengthen actual demand for on-chain USD, Coinbase is simultaneously expanding the Base ecosystem with a wide array of applications:

    • On-Chain U.S. Stock Trading: Coinbase is seeking SEC approval to tokenize U.S. equities, planning to launch products that allow trading of Apple, Tesla, and other stocks directly on-chain—removing geographical barriers from traditional markets.
    • Collaboration with Circle: The launch of Circle Payments Network (CPN) provides USDC with robust clearing infrastructure. As the leading stablecoin on Base, USDC will support DeFi, RWA, and cross-border payment applications—positioning Base as a key hub for compliant blockchain finance.
    • Global Crypto Payments: Coinbase is working with Shopify and Stripe to integrate USDC into e-commerce checkout systems, expanding the real-world use of stablecoins in cross-border settlements.
    • Compliant DeFi and On-Chain Lending: Protocols such as Aerodrome, Uniswap, and Spark are being guided toward KYC-enabled, compliant operations, offering secure and auditable services in trading and lending for both institutions and retail users.
    • AI Agents and InfoFi Applications: New on-chain innovations like AI Agents and attention economy platforms (e.g., Kaito) are being explored to attract traditional users into emerging crypto-native interaction models.

    Through this multi-layered strategy, Coinbase is not only building a regulated on-chain asset highway, but also constructing a value loop for USD stablecoins—from fiat onboarding and token issuance to liquidity, circulation, and real-world application.

    High-Potential Projects in the Base Ecosystem

    • Aerodrome: As the flagship DEX on Base and a key partner in Coinbase’s integration plan, Aerodrome is well-positioned to benefit from stable institutional liquidity flows. This will likely boost trading volume, TVL, and protocol revenues. Holders of AERO tokens stand to gain from enhanced fee-sharing and staking yields, reinforcing user participation in governance.
    • Uniswap: Similarly, Uniswap—another DEX integrated by Coinbase—will gain increased on-chain liquidity and potential platform revenue, thereby enhancing the value proposition of its UNI token.
    • Keeta: A high-performance RWA-focused chain claiming millions of TPS and sub-second confirmation times. Backed by investors including former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, Keeta has already validated its performance through independent stress testing. Despite significant token price corrections, it is expected to collaborate with Base on compliant RWA integration.
    • Creator Bid: In partnership with Kaito, Creator Bid launched version 2.0 with new features such as staking-based launches, increasing user engagement and expanding creator economy models. The platform’s BID token recently reached a historical market cap of $150 million, showing early signs of traction. Similar to Virtual’s early-stage momentum, Creator Bid is poised for continued growth as it iterates.
    • Upside: The first socially driven prediction market on Base. Users can tokenize X/Twitter posts, articles, and videos, and use USDC to vote and trade on them. Currently in its second test season with ~20,000 followers on X, the platform has not yet issued a token, but its unique blend of prediction and content mechanics gives it strong potential to become a liquid and narrative-rich application on Base.

    Conclusion

    Base is undergoing a transformation—from being merely a “high-activity trading L2” into a structurally complete financial and content infrastructure on-chain. From innovation-driven projects like Virtual and Kaito, to Coinbase’s efforts in building a robust USD-denominated ecosystem, the narrative of Base is evolving.

    While short-term hype cycles may cool and speculative behaviors persist, Base’s long-term strength lies in its consistent storytelling and institutional alignment. It is increasingly poised to serve as a bridge between traditional capital and Web3, making it not just a rotating narrative hotspot, but a vital reference point for tracking the crypto industry’s broader shift toward compliance, financialization, and utility.

    About BitMart

    BitMart is a premier global digital asset trading platform with more than 10 million users worldwide. Consistently ranked among the top crypto exchanges on CoinGecko, BitMart offers over 1,700 trading pairs with competitive fees. Committed to continuous innovation and financial inclusivity, BitMart empowers users globally to trade seamlessly. Learn more about BitMart at Website, follow their X (Twitter), or join their Telegram for updates, news, and promotions. Download BitMart App to trade anytime, anywhere.

    Risk Warning:

    The information provided is for reference only and should not be considered a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any financial asset. All information is provided in good faith. However, we make no representations or warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability or completeness of such information.

    All cryptocurrency investments (including returns) are highly speculative in nature and involve significant risk of loss. Past, hypothetical or simulated performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. The value of digital currencies may rise or fall, and there may be significant risks in buying, selling, holding or trading digital currencies. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital currencies is suitable for you based on your personal investment objectives, financial situation and risk tolerance. BitMart does not provide any investment, legal or tax advice.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Kayne Anderson Energy Infrastructure Fund Provides Unaudited Balance Sheet Information and Announces Its Net Asset Value and Asset Coverage Ratios as of June 30, 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    HOUSTON, July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Kayne Anderson Energy Infrastructure Fund, Inc. (the “Company”) (NYSE: KYN) today provided a summary unaudited statement of assets and liabilities and announced its net asset value and asset coverage ratios under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”) as of June 30, 2025.

    As of June 30, 2025, the Company’s net assets were $2.4 billion, and its net asset value per share was $14.10. As of June 30, 2025, the Company’s asset coverage ratio under the 1940 Act with respect to senior securities representing indebtedness was 714% and the Company’s asset coverage ratio under the 1940 Act with respect to total leverage (debt and preferred stock) was 521%.

    STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
    JUNE 30, 2025   // (UNAUDITED)    
     
        (in millions)
    Investments   $ 3,279.5  
    Cash and cash equivalents     6.0  
    Accrued income     2.8  
    Other assets     0.8  
    Total assets     3,289.1  
         
    Credit facility     45.0  
    Notes     368.2  
    Unamortized notes issuance costs     (2.5 )
    Preferred stock     153.6  
    Unamortized preferred stock issuance costs     (1.1 )
    Total leverage     563.2  
         
    Other liabilities     9.9  
    Current tax liability, net     12.6  
    Deferred tax liability, net     319.1  
    Total liabilities     341.6  
         
    Net assets   $ 2,384.3  
         
     

    The Company had 169,126,038 common shares outstanding as of June 30, 2025.

    Long-term investments were comprised of Midstream Energy Companies (94%), Power Infrastructure (3%) and Other (3%).

    The Company’s ten largest holdings by issuer at June 30, 2025 were:

          Amount
    (in millions)*
    % Long Term
    Investments
    1. The Williams Companies, Inc. (Midstream Energy Company)     $373.3   11.4 %
    2. Energy Transfer LP (Midstream Energy Company)     331.3   10.1 %
    3. Enterprise Products Partners L.P. (Midstream Energy Company)     315.6   9.6 %
    4. MPLX LP (Midstream Energy Company)     311.7   9.5 %
    5. Cheniere Energy, Inc. (Midstream Energy Company)               274.2   8.4 %
    6. Kinder Morgan, Inc. (Midstream Energy Company)     225.9   6.9 %
    7. ONEOK, Inc. (Midstream Energy Company)                    215.4   6.6 %
    8. Targa Resources Corp. (Midstream Energy Company)     168.1   5.1 %
    9. TC Energy Corporation (Midstream Energy Company)     164.1   5.0 %
    10. Western Midstream Partners, LP (Midstream Energy Company)     109.9   3.3 %
                   
    * Includes ownership of equity and debt investments
                   

    Portfolio holdings are subject to change without notice. The mention of specific securities is not a recommendation or solicitation for any person to buy, sell or hold any particular security. You can obtain a complete listing of holdings by viewing the Company’s most recent quarterly or annual report.

    Kayne Anderson Energy Infrastructure Fund, Inc. (NYSE: KYN) is a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, whose common stock is traded on the NYSE. The Company’s investment objective is to provide a high after-tax total return with an emphasis on making cash distributions to stockholders. KYN intends to achieve this objective by investing at least 80% of its total assets in securities of Energy Infrastructure Companies. See Glossary of Key Terms in the Company’s most recent quarterly or annual report for a description of these investment categories and the meaning of capitalized terms.

    This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation to buy, nor shall there be any sale of any securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer or sale is not permitted. Nothing contained in this press release is intended to recommend any investment policy or investment strategy or consider any investor’s specific objectives or circumstances. Before investing, please consult with your investment, tax, or legal adviser regarding your individual circumstances.

    CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS: This communication contains statements reflecting assumptions, expectations, projections, intentions, or beliefs about future events. These and other statements not relating strictly to historical or current facts constitute forward-looking statements as defined under the U.S. federal securities laws. Forward-looking statements involve a variety of risks and uncertainties. These risks include but are not limited to changes in economic and political conditions; regulatory and legal changes; energy industry risk; leverage risk; valuation risk; interest rate risk; tax risk; and other risks discussed in detail in the Company’s filings with the SEC, available at www.kaynefunds.com or www.sec.gov. Actual events could differ materially from these statements or our present expectations or projections. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date they are made. Kayne Anderson undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements made herein. There is no assurance that the Company’s investment objectives will be attained.

    Contact investor relations at 877-657-3863 or cef@kayneanderson.com.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: APA Corporation Releases 2025 Sustainability Publications

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    HOUSTON, July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — APA Corporation (Nasdaq: APA) today released its sustainability publications highlighting progress in environmental stewardship, social responsibility and corporate governance throughout 2024. This year, APA simplified its reporting into two complementary documents. Our Approach to Sustainability details the ongoing sustainability programs and initiatives. The 2025 Sustainability Progress Report contains progress on 2024 goals, yearly highlights, key performance data and new goals for 2025. To explore the publications, visit https://apacorp.com/sustainability.

    “Our sustainability progress is tangible,” said APA CEO John J. Christmann IV. “APA has taken meaningful steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, minimize freshwater usage, and protect sensitive ecosystems. We remain committed to a strong safety culture and responsible operations. We are proud to share our 2024 highlights in the pages of our progress report.”

    Highlights from the 2025 Sustainability Progress Report include:

    • Air – As industry partners, APA focuses on reducing emissions by setting goals, sharing knowledge, and delivering commitments. The company exceeded its goal to eliminate at least 1 million tonnes of annualized carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions between 2021 and 2024, completing over 50 global projects that eliminated 1.24 million tonnes of annualized CO2e emissions.
    • Water – APA aims to minimize freshwater use by recycling produced water, sourcing alternatives, and reducing overall water requirements for its operations. Ninety-seven percent of the global water use was produced water and brackish, nonfresh water.
    • People – As an organization, APA is committed to the health and safety of its employees, contractors and people in the communities where it operates. APA achieved or exceeded all corporate safety targets in 2024, including its lowest global Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR) in company history at 0.16.
    • Community – In efforts to continue building a sustainable future, APA continues its work across three focus areas of community well-being, energy poverty and conservation. In 2024, APA spent 44% of its operating area’s budgets with local suppliers and contractors.

    About APA

    APA Corporation owns consolidated subsidiaries that explore for and produce oil and natural gas in the United States, Egypt and the United Kingdom and that explore for oil and natural gas offshore Suriname and elsewhere. APA posts announcements, operational updates, investor information and press releases on its website, www.apacorp.com.

    Contacts

    Investor: (281) 302-2286
    Media: (713) 296-7276
    Website: www.apacorp.com

    APA-G

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-Evening Report: New laws to make it harder for large Australian and foreign companies to avoid paying tax

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kerrie Sadiq, Professor of Taxation, QUT Business School, and ARC Future Fellow, Queensland University of Technology

    The Conversation, CC BY

    The beginning of the financial year means for the first time in Australia the public will see previously unreleased tax reports produced by multinational taxpayers.

    These documents, known as country-by-country reports, or CbCR for short, contain information about the tax practices of large Australian businesses and foreign businesses operating in Australia. This information, previously only available to the taxpayer and the Australian Tax Office, will be made public.

    Country-by-country reports, announced in the October 2022-2023 budget, were introduced with other measures designed to improve corporate tax behaviour. The reports will be released from this week as part of corporate reporting practices. Multinationals have 12 months to comply.

    A fairer tax system

    Country-by-country reporting forms part of the government’s multinational tax integrity election commitment package. The aim is to ensure a fairer and more sustainable tax system. Large firms will be required to publish a statement on their global activities plus tax information for each jurisdiction in which they operate.

    Until now, large multinationals only had to prepare annual consolidated financial statements under international financial reporting standards. The traditional reports aggregate results and provide limited geographic reporting information.

    Traditional high-level reporting allows multinationals to conceal their country-level activities. This hides questionable tax practices.

    Country-by-country reporting allows us to better see where a multinational operates. More importantly, the amount of activity in each jurisdiction is reported. The information provides clues as to whether artificial profit shifting has occurred.

    Anyone interested can uncover details about how multinationals structure their global operations. Information may reveal a misalignment between the company’s real economic presence in a country, the profits they book and taxes they pay in that country.

    Bringing Australia into line with the EU

    Country-by-country reporting is not new. It is the requirement that the information be made public that has changed.

    Australian firms have been required to provide such reports to the Australian Tax Office since 2016. However, the information has been confidential.

    The new public disclosure law brings Australia in line with large firms operating in the European Union which brought in the change last year.

    How country-by-country reporting works

    A taxpayer with annual global income above A$1 billion and at least A$10 million of its turnover Australian-sourced will need to produce a report. The obligation to disclose rests with the parent entity no matter where they are located.

    Australia’s largest companies, including mining giants Rio Tinto and BHP, biotech firm CSL, and investment bank Macquarie Group, will be among those expected to report, as will foreign tech behemoths such as Apple, Amazon, Microsoft and Meta.

    These tech giants are the same US firms likely to be excluded from the global minimum tax rules under a G7 agreement reached last week. Under the agreement, US multinationals were exempted from paying more corporate tax overseas. Other G7 members gave in to protect their own companies from the US’s threat of retaliation.

    Under the law change in Australia, a parent entity will provide its name, the names of all members of the group, a description of their approach to tax, and information about operations in certain countries. Included on the list are countries that attract multinationals due to reduced tax obligations, such as Singapore, Switzerland, and the Bahamas.

    Everyone will be able to see where a multinational is operating. They will also see the types of business activities conducted, number of employees, assets, revenue, and taxes paid. Large profits in a country but little business activity and very few employees may raise questions, especially if a country has a low tax rate.

    Benefits of better transparency

    Access to the extra information will help investors assess the tax and reputational risk of a firm. A multinational that shifts profits to low tax countries may be audited and pay extra tax and penalties.

    Increased transparency allows greater scrutiny. In turn, it is hoped multinationals will reduce aggressive tax planning due to potential risk to their reputation.

    If multinationals shift less taxable profits out of Australia to low-tax or no-tax jurisdictions, this will lead to Australia receiving a greater share of much needed corporate tax revenue.

    Reducing profit shifting

    Recent academic research on public country-by-country reporting reveals it provides additional information to better identify tax haven activity. However, it does not result in a significant drop in corporate tax avoidance.

    Increased tax transparency helps investors and tax authorities to better understand a multinational’s economic and tax geographic footprint. It is also important when it seems that US giants will be excluded from the 15% global minimum tax rules. Transparency by itself, however, does not lead to multinationals paying more corporate taxes.

    By its very nature, tax avoidance is legal but pushes the boundaries by going against the spirit of the law. Indeed, many large multinationals argue tax is a legal obligation and is not voluntary. They maintain they pay the tax required of them according to the law.

    Undoubtedly, Australia’s new public country-by-country regime is a positive step for tax transparency. As a country initiative, it has been applauded as groundbreaking and world leading. However, it is not a panacea to corporate tax avoidance.

    To limit corporate tax avoidance and have multinationals pay more corporate taxes, we must get to the heart of the problem. We must change the law that dictates the way multinationals are taxed.

    Kerrie Sadiq currently receives funding from the Australian Research Council. She has previously received research grants from CPA Australia and CAANZ.

    Rodney Brown has previously received research grants from CPA Australia and CAANZ.

    ref. New laws to make it harder for large Australian and foreign companies to avoid paying tax – https://theconversation.com/new-laws-to-make-it-harder-for-large-australian-and-foreign-companies-to-avoid-paying-tax-260004

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI: RBB Bancorp to Report Second Quarter 2025 Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LOS ANGELES, July 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — RBB Bancorp (NASDAQ: RBB) and its subsidiaries, Royal Business Bank (the “Bank”) and RBB Asset Management Company (“RAM”), collectively referred to herein as the “Company”, today announced that it will release financial results for its second quarter ended June 30, 2025 after the markets close on Monday, July 21, 2025.

    Management will hold a conference call at 11:00 a.m. Pacific Time/2:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, July 22, 2025 to discuss the Company’s financial results.

    To listen to the conference call, please dial 1-888-506-0062 or 1-973-528-0011, passcode 710803, Conference ID RBBQ225. A replay of the call will be made available at 1-877-481-4010 or 1-919-882-2331, passcode 52690, approximately one hour after the conclusion of the call and will remain available through August 05, 2025.

    Additionally, interested parties can listen to a live webcast of the call in the “Investor Relations” section of the Company’s website at www.royalbusinessbankusa.com.  This webcast will be recorded and available for replay on the Company’s website approximately two hours after the conclusion of the conference call.

    Corporate Overview

    RBB Bancorp is a community-based financial holding company headquartered in Los Angeles, California. As of March 31, 2025, the Company had total assets of $4.0 billion. Its wholly-owned subsidiary, Royal Business Bank, is a full service commercial bank, which provides consumer and business banking services predominantly to the Asian-centric communities in Los Angeles County, Orange County, and Ventura County in California, in Las Vegas, Nevada, in Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan in New York, in Edison, New Jersey, in the Chicago neighborhoods of Chinatown and Bridgeport, Illinois, and on Oahu, Hawaii. Bank services include remote deposit, E-banking, mobile banking, commercial and investor real estate loans, business loans and lines of credit, commercial and industrial loans, SBA 7A and 504 loans, 1-4 single family residential loans, trade finance, a full range of depository account products and wealth management services. The Bank has nine branches in Los Angeles County, two branches in Ventura County, one branch in Orange County, California, one branch in Las Vegas, Nevada, three branches and one loan operation center in Brooklyn, three branches in Queens, one branch in Manhattan in New York, one branch in Edison, New Jersey, two branches in Chicago, Illinois, and one branch in Honolulu, Hawaii. The Company’s administrative and lending center is located at 1055 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, California 90017, and its finance and operations center is located at 7025 Orangethorpe Ave., Buena Park, California 90621. The Company’s website address is www.royalbusinessbankusa.com.

    Contacts
    Lynn Hopkins, EVP and Chief Financial Officer, (657) 255-3282

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to unpublished conference abstract looking at microplastics in human reproductive fluids

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    An unpublished conference abstract presented at the ESHRE 41st Annual Meeting in Paris looks at microplastics in human reproductive fluids.

    Prof Oliver Jones, Professor of Chemistry, RMIT University, said:

    “It is hard to say much at all about this study without knowing the full details of the methods used and the precautions taken against background contamination.  All we have to go on is a very brief abstract, not a peer-reviewed paper.  Many previous scary-sounding headlines on microplastics in blood and food have turned out to be measurement errors by people unfamiliar with the problems of microplastic measurements1,2 and/or background contamination3.  I don’t think lab contamination can be ruled out in this case.  The most common plastic found, PTFE, is very widely used in laboratories, including IVF labs, and background contamination makes all forms of microplastic analysis extremely technically challenging.

    “Even if we assume no measurement errors, the results are from a total of 51 individuals, so they are far from conclusive (a limitation acknowledged by the authors), and this study does not claim to demonstrate any harm.  We would need these findings to be replicated, ideally in other laboratories around the world, before we could tell if this was a one-off event or not.  So, while the data are certainly interesting, they are at best preliminary.  I don’t think people who may be trying to conceive, either naturally or via IVF, need to be concerned.”

    References
    1 Kuhlman, R. L., Letter to the editor, discovery and quantification of plastic particle pollution in human blood. Environment International 2022, 167, 107400, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412022003270?via%3Dihub

    2 Mühlschlegel, P. et al. Lack of evidence for microplastic contamination in honey. Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A 2017, 34 (11), 1982-1989, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28665769/  

    3 Rauert C.  et al. Blueprint for the design construction and validation of a plastic and phthalate-minimised laboratory. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2024 468 133803, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304389424003820

    Dr Channa Jayasena, Associate Professor in Reproductive Endocrinology, Imperial College London, said:

    “Microplastics are able to interfere with how cells in different bits of the body speak to each other, and can cause cell damage.  Unfortunately, it is no longer a surprise that microplastics find their way into the fluids which are essential for men and women to reproduce.  This study was very small, and did not report fertility outcomes in the study participants.  But it was well-designed study using state-of-the-art technology to show just how commonly microplastics enter reproductive fluids.  They showed that most of the studied samples in men and women contained microplastics.  Some previous studies have reported that microplastic exposure is associated with lower-than-normal fertility in men.  The results contribute to a growing concern for public health – we don’t know what the impact of all types of microplastics are on reproductive function in men and women.  Understanding this will help us understand how big a problem microplastics post for fertility in society.”

    Dr Stephanie Wright, Associate Professor in Environmental Toxicology, Imperial College London, said:

    “Without information on the sizes of the microplastic particles observed, it is challenging to interpret how meaningful this data is.  There is a high potential for samples to become contaminated with microplastic throughout the sampling, laboratory processing, and analysis procedures.  If stringent steps to minimise this are taken, other clues such as the size of the particles observed can be used to rule out such contamination, with there being a greater likelihood for smaller particles ( 0.01 mm) being absorbed and redistributed around the body.  It is not a surprise that microplastics have been found – they are everywhere, even in the lab – but the data provided do not support that they are there as a result of human exposure as opposed to methodological artefact and must be interpreted with caution at this early stage.”

    Prof Fay Couceiro, Professor of Environmental Pollution, and Head of the Microplastics Research Group, University of Portsmouth, said:

    “As this is not peer reviewed and there is no detailed methodology it is difficult to give specific information on quality etc.  Here are some general comments:

    “The study is very interesting and considering the global reduction in fertility rates, looking at possible causes is very topical and timely.  As the authors state, finding microplastics is not that surprising as we have found them in lots of other areas of our bodies. Presence is also not the same as impact and the authors are clear that while they have found microplastics in the reproductive fluids of both men and women, we still don’t know how they are affecting us.  As a preliminary study the work is interesting, but more information is required on numbers of microplastics found, sizes, method blanks and any plastics used during the medical procedures before any real conclusions can be made.  I look forward to reading the full article once it is ready. (A method blank is when you run the experimental steps, but with clean water, and then analyse that to see if you have any microplastics in it.  This would let you know if there is any external contamination, and if the microplastics in the samples are from the reproductive fluid, or introduced from the digestion and analysis steps.  It would be very unusual not to see any microplastics in the blanks if they are looking below 10 micrometres in size range. At that size, microplastics are in the air and very hard to get away from.  If they only analysed larger particles then you tend to find less in your method blanks, but it is common practice to give these in a full paper so that people can see if the number you are finding in your samples is higher than in the blanks.)

    Does the press release accurately reflect the science?

    “To the extent of which data is available it does, it is clear this is only looking at the presence of microplastics and not impacts.

    Is this good quality research?  Are the conclusions backed up by solid data?

    “Very hard to judge without more in depth information on methods, numbers found in blanks, size ranges of microplastics etc.

    Is there enough data available to be able to judge the quality of this work?

    “At this stage I would say no – as above the methods really need to be more detailed.  Microplastics are everywhere and even with the best methods you find some in the blanks at the smaller sizes (less than 10 um).  They say they looked in the containers but the method blank data is missing as are the actual numbers found, e.g. is it 10 microplastics per ml of SF?  Is 10 significantly greater than what was found in the method blank?  Size range is also very important and not mentioned anywhere I can see.

    Is this a peer-reviewed journal publication or more preliminary?

    “Preliminary.

    How does this work fit with the existing evidence?

    “It is expected as microplastics have been found in all bodily fluids/organs tested.

    Have the authors accounted for confounders?  Are there important limitations to be aware of?

    “It is unclear if there is any plastic used in the collection of the samples as I am unfamiliar with the procedures – the storage vessel is glass but is plastic used in the follicular aspiration?  Many medical instruments are made from plastic, is that the case here?

    What are the implications in the real world?  Is there any overspeculation?

    “No – they are clear this is just a presence/absence experiment and that further work needs to take place to determine any impacts.”

    Abstract title: ‘Unveiling the Hidden Danger: Detection and characterisation of microplastics in human follicular and seminal fluids’ by E. Gomez-Sanchez et al. It will be presented at the ESHRE 41st Annual Meeting in Paris, and the embargo lifted at 23:01 UK time on Tuesday 1 July 2025.

    There is no paper.

    Declared interests

    Prof Oliver Jones: “I am a Professor of Chemistry at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia.  I conduct research into environmental pollution, including microplastics.  I have no conflicts of interest to declare.”

    Dr Channa Jayasena: “None.”

    Dr Stephanie Wright: “Own research: MRC, NERC, NIHR, Common Seas, Minderoo Foundation, LECO;

    To attend scientific meetings: American Chemistry Council – to attend a workshop on microplastic reference materials (2022); Minderoo Foundation – to attend workshops on microplastic measurement in human tissue (2024, 2025);

    Current or previous advisory roles or committee membership: ILSI Europe, PlasticsEurope (BRIGID project), Cefic LRI projects advisory roles, have been a temporary member of UK Air Quality Expert Group;

    Previous employment in companies: none.”

    Prof Fay Couceiro: “I work in the field of microplastics but I was not involved in the study and I am not working with the authors.  I am unaware of any conflict of interest.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: New director bolsters freight expertise on KiwiRail board

    Source: New Zealand Government

    The appointment of Scott O’Donnell to the KiwiRail board will bolster its freight expertise Minister for Rail Winston Peters says. 

    “Railways have no shortage of potential for New Zealand, and we expect to see sustained growth in earnings, revenue, volumes, reliability, and safety to turn this business into something great.”

    Mr O’Donnell is a current director of HW Richardson Group and was its managing director from 2006 to 2015. The Group owns 46 companies, employing 2000 people across six sectors including road freight.

     “Mr O’Donnell, new Chair Sue Tindal and the Treasury have established a conflict-of-interest management plan which will be reviewed and monitored.

     “The company’s road freight operation is primarily south of Oamaru, and as such Mr O’Donnell will recuse himself from KiwiRail activities in this part of New Zealand. 

    “Mr O’Donnell has resigned as chair of HW Richardson-owned Dynes Transport but remains on its board, noting this company is receiving Government co-investment for a rail siding into a new Mosgiel road and rail freight hub,” Mr Peters says.

    Term: 1 September 2025 – 31 August 2028

    Biography: Scott O’Donnell is a Director of the HW Richardson (HWR) Group and was previously Managing Director of the Group from 2006 to 2015. In addition to his directorship, Mr O’Donnell spearheads the HWR Group Property portfolio that is responsible for various projects across New Zealand. Mr O’Donnell has led HWR Group through a decade of considerable growth, in both company size, business growth and diversification. His deep expertise both operational and governance in property management, transport, freight, and logistics as well as his commercial nous will add important strategic insights to KiwiRail’s business.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Pop, soda or coke? The fizzy history behind America’s favorite linguistic debate

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Valerie M. Fridland, Professor of Linguistics, University of Nevada, Reno

    ‘I’ll have a coke – no, not Coca-Cola, Sprite.’ Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

    With burgers sizzling and classic rock thumping, many Americans revel in summer cookouts – at least until that wayward cousin asks for a “pop” in soda country, or even worse, a “coke” when they actually want a Sprite.

    Few American linguistic debates have bubbled quite as long and effervescently as the one over whether a generic soft drink should be called a soda, pop or coke.

    The word you use generally boils down to where you’re from: Midwesterners enjoy a good pop, while soda is tops in the North and far West. Southerners, long the cultural mavericks, don’t bat an eyelash asking for coke – lowercase – before homing in on exactly the type they want: Perhaps a root beer or a Coke, uppercase.

    As a linguist who studies American dialects, I’m less interested in this regional divide and far more fascinated by the unexpected history behind how a fizzy “health” drink from the early 1800s spawned the modern soft drink’s many names and iterations.

    Bubbles, anyone?

    Foods and drinks with wellness benefits might seem like a modern phenomenon, but the urge to create drinks with medicinal properties inspired what might be called a soda revolution in the 1800s.

    An 1878 engraving of a soda fountain.
    Smith Collection/Gado via Getty Images

    The process of carbonating water was first discovered in the late 1700s. By the early 1800s, this carbonated water had become popular as a health drink and was often referred to as “soda water.” The word “soda” likely came from “sodium,” since these drinks often contained salts, which were then believed to have healing properties.

    Given its alleged curative effects for health issues such as indigestion, pharmacists sold soda water at soda fountains, innovative devices that created carbonated water to be sold by the glass. A chemistry professor, Benjamin Stillman, set up the first such device in a drugstore in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1806. Its eventual success inspired a boom of soda fountains in drugstores and health spas.

    By the mid-1800s, pharmacists were creating unique root-, fruit- and herb-infused concoctions, such as sassafras-based root beer, at their soda fountains, often marketing them as cures for everything from fatigue to foul moods.

    These flavored, sweetened versions gave rise to the linking of the word “soda” with a sweetened carbonated beverage, as opposed to simple, carbonated water.

    Seltzer – today’s popular term for such sparkling water – was around, too. But it was used only for the naturally carbonated mineral water from the German town Nieder-Selters. Unlike Perrier, sourced similarly from a specific spring in France, seltzer made the leap to becoming a generic term for fizzy water.

    Many late-19th-century and early 20th-century drugstores contained soda fountains – a nod to the original belief that the sugary, bubbly drink possessed medicinal qualities.
    Hall of Electrical History Foundation/Corbis via Getty Images

    Regional naming patterns

    So how did “soda” come to be called so many different things in different places?

    It all stems from a mix of economic enterprise and linguistic ingenuity.

    The popularity of “soda” in the Northeast likely reflects the soda fountain’s longer history in the region. Since a lot of Americans living in the Northeast migrated to California in the mid-to-late 1800s, the name likely traveled west with them.

    As for the Midwestern preference for “pop” – well, the earliest American use of the term to refer to a sparkling beverage appeared in the 1840s in the name of a flavored version called “ginger pop.” Such ginger-flavored pop, though, was around in Britain by 1816, since a Newcastle songbook is where you can first see it used in text. The “pop” seems to be onomatopoeic for the noise made when the cork was released from the bottle before drinking.

    A jingle for Faygo touts the company’s ‘red pop.’

    Linguists don’t fully know why “pop” became so popular in the Midwest. But one theory links it to a Michigan bottling company, Feigenson Brothers Bottling Works – today known as Faygo Beverages – that used “pop” in the name of the sodas they marketed and sold. Another theory suggests that because bottles were more common in the region, soda drinkers were more likely to hear the “pop” sound than in the Northeast, where soda fountains reigned.

    As for using coke generically, the first Coca-Cola was served in 1886 by Dr. John Pemberton, a pharmacist at Jacobs’ Pharmacy in Atlanta and the founder of the company. In the 1900s, the Coca-Cola company tried to stamp out the use of “Coke” for “Coca-Cola.” But that ship had already sailed. Since Coca-Cola originated and was overwhelmingly popular in the South, its generic use grew out of the fact that people almost always asked for “Coke.”

    No alcohol means not ‘hard’ but ‘soft.’
    Nostalgic Collections/eBay

    As with Jell-O, Kleenex, Band-Aids and seltzer, it became a generic term.

    What’s soft about it?

    Speaking of soft drinks, what’s up with that term?

    It was originally used to distinguish all nonalcoholic drinks from “hard drinks,” or beverages containing spirits.

    Interestingly, the original Coca-Cola formula included wine – resembling a type of alcoholic “health” drink popular overseas, Vin Mariani. But Pemberton went on to develop a “soft” version a few years later to be sold as a medicinal drink.

    Due to the growing popularity of soda water concoctions, eventually “soft drink” came to mean only such sweetened carbonated beverages, a linguistic testament to America’s enduring love affair with sugar and bubbles.

    With the average American guzzling almost 40 gallons per year, you can call it whatever you what. Just don’t call it healthy.

    Valerie M. Fridland does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Pop, soda or coke? The fizzy history behind America’s favorite linguistic debate – https://theconversation.com/pop-soda-or-coke-the-fizzy-history-behind-americas-favorite-linguistic-debate-259114

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: 1 in 4 Americans reject evolution, a century after the Scopes monkey trial spotlighted the clash between science and religion

    Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By William Trollinger, Professor of History, University of Dayton

    The 1925 Scopes trial, in which a Dayton, Tennessee, teacher was charged with violating state law by teaching biological evolution, was one of the earliest and most iconic conflicts in America’s ongoing culture war.

    Charles Darwin’s “Origin of Species,” published in 1859, and subsequent scientific research made the case that humans and other animals evolved from earlier species over millions of years. Many late-19th-century American Protestants had little problem accommodating Darwin’s ideas – which became mainstream biology – with their religious commitments.

    But that was not the case with all Christians, especially conservative evangelicals, who held that the Bible is inerrant – without error – and factually accurate in all that it has to say, including when it speaks on history and science.

    The Scopes trial occurred July 10-21, 1925. Between 150 and 200 reporters swooped into the small town. Broadcast on Chicago’s WGN, it was the first trial to be aired live over radio in the United States.

    One hundred years after the trial, and as we have documented in our scholarly work, the culture war over evolution and creationism remains strong – and yet, when it comes to creationism, much has also changed.

    The trial

    In May 1919, over 6,000 conservative Protestants gathered in Philadelphia to create, under the leadership of Baptist firebrand William Bell Riley, the World’s Christian Fundamentals Association, or WCFA.

    Holding to biblical inerrancy, these “fundamentalists” believed in the creation account detailed in chapter 1 of Genesis, in which God brought all life into being in six days. But most of these fundamentalists also accepted mainstream geology, which held that the Earth was millions of years old. Squaring a literal understanding of Genesis with an old Earth, they embraced either the “day-age theory” – that each Genesis day was actually a long period of time – or the “gap theory,” in which there was a huge gap of time before the six 24-hour days of creation.

    This nascent fundamentalist movement initiated a campaign to pressure state legislatures to prohibit public schools from teaching evolution. One of these states was Tennessee, which in 1925 passed the Butler Act. This law made it illegal for public schoolteachers “to teach any theory that denies the story of divine creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach instead that man has descended from a lower order of animals.”

    The American Civil Liberties Union persuaded John Thomas Scopes, a young science teacher in Dayton, Tennessee, to challenge the law in court. The WCFA sprang into action, successfully persuading William Jennings Bryan – populist politician and outspoken fundamentalist – to assist the prosecution. In response, the ACLU hired famous attorney Clarence Darrow to serve on the defense team.

    A huge crowd attending the Scopes trial.
    Bettmann/Contributor via Getty Images

    When the trial started, Dayton civic leaders were thrilled with the opportunity to boost their town. Outside the courtroom there was a carnivalesque atmosphere, with musicians, preachers, concession stands and even monkeys.

    Inside the courtroom, the trial became a verbal duel between Bryan and Darrow regarding science and religion. But as the judge narrowed the proceedings to whether or not Scopes violated the law – a point that the defense readily admitted – it seemed clear that Scopes would be found guilty. Many of the reporters thus went home.

    But the trial’s most memorable episode was yet to come. On July 20, Darrow successfully provoked Bryan to take the witness stand as a Bible expert. Due to the huge crowd and suffocating heat, the judge moved the trial outdoors.

    The 3,000 or so spectators witnessed Darrow’s interrogation of Bryan, which was primarily intended to make Bryan and fundamentalism appear foolish and ignorant. Most significant, Darrow’s questions revealed that, despite Bryan’s’ assertion that he read the Bible literally, Bryan actually understood the six days of Genesis not as 24-hour days, but as six long and indeterminate periods of time.

    American lawyer and politician William Jennings Bryan during the Scopes trial in Dayton, Tenn.
    Hulton Archive/Getty Image

    The very next day, the jury found Scopes guilty and fined him US$100. Riley and the fundamentalists cheered the verdict as a triumph for the Bible and morality.

    The fundamentalists and ‘The Genesis Flood’

    But very soon that sense of triumph faded, partly because of news stories that portrayed fundamentalists as ignorant rural bigots. In one such example, a prominent journalist, H. L. Mencken, wrote in a Baltimore Sun column that the Scopes trial “serves notice on the country that Neanderthal man is organizing in these forlorn backwaters of the land.”

    The media ridicule encouraged many scholars and journalists to conclude that creationism and fundamentalism would soon disappear from American culture. But that prediction did not come to pass.

    Instead, fundamentalists, including WCFA leader Riley, seemed all the more determined to redouble their efforts at the grassroots level.

    But as Darrow’s interrogation of Bryan made obvious, it was not easy to square a literal reading of the Bible – including the six-day creation outlined in Genesis – with a scientific belief in an old Earth. What fundamentalists needed was a science that supported the idea of a young Earth.

    In their 1961 book, “The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and its Scientific Implications, fundamentalists John Whitcomb, a theologian, and Henry Morris, a hydraulic engineer, provided just such a scientific explanation. Making use, without attribution, of the writings of Seventh-day Adventist geologist George McCready Price, Whitcomb and Morris made the case that Noah’s global flood lasted one year and created the geological strata and mountain ranges that made the Earth seem ancient.

    “The Genesis Flood” and its version of flood geology remains ubiquitous among fundamentalists and other conservative Protestants.

    Young Earth creationism

    Today, opinion polls reveal that roughly one-quarter of all Americans are adherents of this newer strand of creationism, which rejects both mainstream geology as well as mainstream biology.

    Replica of Noah’s Ark at the Ark Encounter, near Williamstown, Ky.
    Ron Buskirk/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

    This popular embrace of young Earth creationism also explains the success of Answers in Genesis – AiG – which is the world’s largest creationist organization, with a website that attracts millions of visitors every year.

    AiG’s tourist sites – the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, and the Ark Encounter in Williamstown, Kentucky – have attracted millions of visitors since their opening in 2007 and 2016. Additional AiG sites are planned for Branson, Missouri, and Pigeon Forge, Tennessee.

    Presented as a replica of Noah’s Ark, the Ark Encounter is a gigantic structure – 510 feet long, 85 feet wide, 51 feet high. It includes representations of animal cages as well as plush living quarters for the eight human beings who, according to Genesis chapters 6-8, survived the global flood. Hundreds of placards in the Ark make the case for a young Earth and a global flood that created the geological strata and formations we see today.

    Ark Encounter has been the beneficiary of millions of dollars from state and local governments.

    Besides AiG tourist sites, there is also an ever-expanding network of fundamentalist schools and homeschools that present young Earth creationism as true science. These schools use textbooks from publishers such as Abeka Books, Accelerated Christian Education and Bob Jones University Press.

    The Scopes trial involved what could and could not be taught in public schools regarding creation and evolution. Today, this discussion also involves private schools, given that there are now at least 15 states that have universal private school choice programs, in which families can use taxpayer-funded education money to pay for private schooling and homeschooling.

    In 1921, William Bell Riley admonished his opponents that they should “cease from shoveling in dirt on living men,” for the fundamentalists “refuse to be buried.” A century later, the funeral for fundamentalism and creationism seems a long way off.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. 1 in 4 Americans reject evolution, a century after the Scopes monkey trial spotlighted the clash between science and religion – https://theconversation.com/1-in-4-americans-reject-evolution-a-century-after-the-scopes-monkey-trial-spotlighted-the-clash-between-science-and-religion-258163

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: In LGBTQ+ storybook case, Supreme Court handed a win to parental rights, raising tough questions for educators

    Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Charles J. Russo, Joseph Panzer Chair in Education and Research Professor of Law, University of Dayton

    The parents who brought the case had requested that their children be excused when books with LGBTQ+ characters were used in class. SDI Productions/E+ via Getty Images

    The Supreme Court tends to save its blockbuster orders for the last day of the term – and 2025 was no exception.

    Among the important decisions handed down June 27, 2025, was Mahmoud v. Taylor – a case of particular interest to me, because I teach education law. Mahmoud, I believe, may become one of the court’s most consequential rulings on parental rights.

    An interfaith coalition of Muslim, Orthodox Christian and Catholic parents in Montgomery County, Maryland – including Tamer Mahmoud, for whom the case is named – questioned the school board’s refusal to allow them to opt their young children out of lessons using picture books with LGBTQ+ characters. Ruling in favor of the parents, the court found that the board violated their First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion by requiring their children to sit through lessons with materials inconsistent with their faiths.

    Case history

    The parents in Mahmoud challenged the use of certain storybooks that the board had approved for use in preschool and elementary school. “Pride Puppy!” for example – a book the schools later removed – portrays a family whose pet gets lost at a LGBTQ+ Pride parade, with each page devoted to a letter of the alphabet. The book’s “search and find” list of words directs readers to look for terms in the pictures, including “(drag) queen” and “king,” “leather” and “lip ring.” Other materials included stories about same-sex marriage, a transgender child, and nonbinary bathroom signs.

    Initially, school administrators agreed to allow opt-outs for students whose parents objected to the materials. A day later, however, educators changed their minds. School officials cited concerns about absenteeism, the feasibility of accommodating opt-out requests, and a desire to avoid stigmatizing LGBTQ+ students or families.

    In August 2023, a federal trial court rejected the parents’ claim that officials had violated their fundamental due process right to direct the care, custody and education of their children. The following year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit affirmed in favor of the board, finding that officials did not violate the parents’ rights to the free exercise of their religious beliefs, as protected by the First Amendment.

    A group of parents in Montgomery County, Maryland, protest the lack of opt-outs on July 20, 2023.
    Celal Gunes/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images

    On appeal, a 6-3 Supreme Court reversed in favor of the parents. Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the court’s opinion, was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, plus Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

    Supreme Court

    In brief, the court held that by denying the parental requests to opt their children out of instruction inconsistent with their beliefs, school officials violated their First Amendment right to the free exercise of religion.

    Alito largely grounded the court’s rationale in a dispute from 1925, Pierce v. Society of Sisters of the Holy Name of Jesus and Mary, and even more heavily on 1972’s Wisconsin v. Yoder. Both cases recognize the primacy of parental rights to direct the education of their children. According to Pierce’s famous dictum, “the child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.”

    In Yoder, Amish parents – an Anabaptist Christian community that avoids using many modern technologies – objected to sending their children to school after eighth grade because this would have violated their religious beliefs. The justices unanimously agreed with the parents that their children received all of the education they needed in their communities. The justices added that requiring the children to attend high school would have violated the parents’ rights to direct their children’s religious upbringing.

    Accordingly, the court acknowledged that the parental right “to guide the religious future and education of their children” was “established beyond debate.”

    Similarly, in Mahmoud the court declared that “the Board’s introduction of the ‘LGBTQ+-inclusive’ storybooks, along with its decision to withhold opt-outs, places an unconstitutional burden on the parents’ rights to the free exercise of their religion.”

    Thomas agreed fully with the court, yet wrote a separate concurrence, which emphasized “an important implication of this decision for schools across the country.” Citing Yoder, Thomas contended that rather than support inclusion, the board’s policy “imposes conformity with a view that undermines parents’ religious beliefs, and thus interferes with the parents’ right to ‘direct the religious upbringing of their children.’”

    Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, feared “the result will be chaos for this Nation’s public schools. Requiring schools to provide advance notice and the chance to opt out of every lesson plan or story time that might implicate a parent’s religious beliefs will impose impossible administrative burdens on schools.”

    Supporters of LGBTQ+ rights demonstrate outside the U.S. Supreme Court during oral arguments in Mahmoud v. Taylor on April 22, 2025.
    Oliver Contreras/AFP via Getty Images

    She maintained that “simply being exposed to beliefs contrary to your own” does not violate a person’s free exercise rights. Insulating children from different ideas, she wrote, denies them of an experience that is crucial for democracy: “practice living in our multicultural society.”

    Implications

    After the decision was handed down, Montgomery County’s Board of Education issued a statement promising to “analyze the Supreme Court decision and develop next steps in alignment with today’s decision, and as importantly, our values.”

    Mahmoud raises challenging questions about the scope or reach of how far parents can question curricular content.

    On the one hand, parents should not be able to micromanage curricular content via the “heckler’s veto,” because this can lead to larger issues. Moreover, while Mahmoud concerns religious rights, what happens if parents question teachings based on another type of sincerely held belief – discussing war if they are pacifist, for example, or capitalism if they are socialists? While Mahmoud dealt with free-exercise rights, it may open the door to other types of First Amendment challenges from parents wishing to exempt their children from lessons.

    On the other hand, Mahmoud highlights the need to take legitimate parental concerns into consideration. While educators typically control instruction, how can they be respectful of parents’ rights as primary caregivers of their children when conflicts arise?

    Mahmoud may go a long way in defining parents’ free-exercise rights in public schools. Still, such disputes are likely far from over in America’s increasingly diverse religious culture.

    Charles J. Russo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. In LGBTQ+ storybook case, Supreme Court handed a win to parental rights, raising tough questions for educators – https://theconversation.com/in-lgbtq-storybook-case-supreme-court-handed-a-win-to-parental-rights-raising-tough-questions-for-educators-260064

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Keeping brain-dead pregnant women on life support raises ethical issues that go beyond abortion politics

    Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Lindsey Breitwieser, Assistant Professor of Gender & Women’s Studies, Hollins University

    Laws such as Georgia’s LIFE Act can complicate ethical and legal decision-making in postmortem pregnancy.
    Darya Komarova/Moment via Getty Images

    Adriana Smith, a 30-year-old woman from Georgia who had been declared brain-dead in February 2025, spent 16 weeks on life support while doctors worked to keep her body functioning well enough to support her developing fetus. On June 13, 2025, her premature baby, named Chance, was born via cesarean section at 25 weeks.

    Smith was nine weeks pregnant when she suffered multiple blood clots in her brain. Her story gained public attention when her mother criticized doctors’ decision to keep her on a ventilator without the family’s consent. Smith’s mother has said that doctors told the family the decision was made to align with Georgia’s LIFE Act, which bans abortion after six weeks of pregnancy and bolsters the legal standing of fetal personhood. A statement released by the hospital also cites Georgia’s abortion law.

    “I’m not saying we would have chosen to terminate her pregnancy,” Smith’s mother told a local television station. “But I’m saying we should have had a choice.”

    The LIFE Act is one of several state laws that have passed across the U.S. since the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson decision invalidated constitutional protections for abortion. Although Georgia’s attorney general denied that the LIFE Act applied to Smith, there’s little doubt that it invites ethical and legal uncertainty when a woman dies while pregnant.

    Smith’s case has swiftly become the focus of a reproductive rights political firestorm characterized by two opposing viewpoints. For some, it reflects demeaning governmental overreach that quashes women’s bodily autonomy. For others it illustrates the righteous sacrifice of motherhood.

    In my work as a gender and technology studies scholar, I have cataloged and studied postmortem pregnancies like Smith’s since 2016. In my view, Smith’s story doesn’t fit straightforwardly into abortion politics. Instead, it points to the need for a more nuanced ethical approach that does not frame a mother and child as adversaries in a medical, legal or political context.

    Birth after death

    For centuries, Catholic dogma and Western legal precedent have mandated immediate cesarean section when a pregnant woman died after quickening, the point when fetal movement becomes discernible. But technological advances now make it possible sometimes for a fetus to continue gestating in place when the mother is brain-dead, or “dead by neurological criteria”– a widely accepted definition of death that first emerged in the 1950s.

    The first brain death during pregnancy in which the fetus was delivered after time on life support, more accurately called organ support, occurred in 1981. The process is extraordinarily intensive and invasive, because the loss of brain function impedes many physiological processes. Health teams, sometimes numbering in the hundreds, must stabilize the bodies of “functionally decapitated” pregnant women to buy more time for fetal development. This requires vital organ support, ventilation, nutritional supplements, antibiotics and constant monitoring. Outcomes are highly uncertain.

    Adriana Smith’s baby was delivered by cesarian section on June 13, 2025.

    Smith’s 112-day stint on organ support ranks third in length for a postmortem pregnancy, with the longest being 123 days. Hers is also the earliest ever gestational age from which the procedure has been attempted. Because time on organ support can vary widely, and because there is no established minimum fetal age considered too early to intervene, a fetus could theoretically be deemed viable at any point in pregnancy.

    Postmortem pregnancy as gender-based violence

    Over the past 50 years, critics of postmortem pregnancy have argued that it constitutes gender-based violence and violates bodily integrity in ways that organ donation does not. Some have compared it with Nazi pronatalist policies. Others have attributed the practice to systemic sexism and racism in medicine. Postmortem pregnancy can also compound intimate partner violence by giving brain-dead women’s murderers decision-making authority when they are the fetus’s next of kin.

    Fetal personhood laws complicate end-of-life decision-making in ways that many consider violent too. As I have seen in my own research, when the fetus is considered a legal person, women’s wishes may be assumed, debated in court or committee, or set aside entirely, nearly always in favor of the fetus.

    From the perspective of reproductive rights advocates, postmortem pregnancy is the bottom of a slippery slope down which anti-abortion sentiment has led America. It obliterates women’s autonomy, pitting living and dead women against doctors, legislators and sometimes their own families, and weaponizing their own fetuses against them.

    A medical perspective on rights

    Viewed through a medical lens, however, postmortem pregnancy is not violent or violating, but an act of repair. Although care teams have responsibilities to both mother and fetus, a pregnant woman’s brain death means she cannot be physically harmed and her rights cannot be violated to the same degree as a fetus with the potential for life.

    Medical practitioners are conditioned to prioritize life over death, motivating a commitment to salvage something from a tragedy and try to partially restore a family. The high-stakes world of emergency medicine makes protecting life reflexive and medical interventions automatic. Once fetal life is detected, as one hospital spokesperson put it in a 1976 news article in The Boston Globe, “What else could you do?”

    This response does not necessarily stem from conscious sexism or anti-abortion sentiment, but from reverence for vulnerable patients. If physicians declare a pregnant woman brain-dead, patienthood often automatically transfers to the fetus needing rescue. No matter its age and despite its survival being dependent on machines, just like its mother, the fetus is entirely animate. Who or what counts as a legal person with privileges and protections might be a political or philosophical determination, but life is a matter of biological fact and within the doctors’ purview.

    The first baby born from a postmortem pregnancy was delivered in 1981.
    Emmanuel Faure/The Image Bank via Getty Images

    An ethics of anti-opposition

    Both of the above perspectives have validity, but neither accounts for postmortem pregnancy’s ethical and biological complexity.

    First, setting mother against fetus, with the rights of one endangering the rights of the other, does not match pregnancy’s lived reality of “two bodies, sutured,” as the cultural scholar Lauren Berlant put it.

    Even the Supreme Court recognized this entangled duality in their 1973 ruling on Roe v. Wade, which established both constitutional protections for abortion and a governmental obligation to protect fetal life. Whether a fetus is considered a legal person or not, they wrote, pregnant women and fetuses “cannot be isolated in their privacy” – meaning that reproductive rights issues must strike a balance, however tenuous, between maternal and fetal interests. To declare postmortem pregnancy unequivocally violent or a loss of the “right to choose” fails to recognize the complexity of choice in a highly politicized medical landscape.

    Second, maternal-fetal competition muddles the right course of action. In the U.S., competent patients are not compelled to engage in medical care they would rather avoid, even if it kills them, or to stay on life support to preserve organs for donation. But when a fetus is treated as an independent patient, exceptions could be made to those medical standards if the fetus’s interests override the mother’s.

    For example, pregnancy disrupts standard determination of death. To protect the fetus, care teams increasingly skip a necessary diagnostic for brain death called apnea testing, which involves momentarily removing the ventilator to test the respiratory centers of the brain stem. In these cases, maternal brain death cannot be confirmed until after delivery. Multiple instances of vaginal deliveries after brain death also remain unexplained, given that the brain coordinates mechanisms of vaginal labor. All in all, it’s not always clear women in these cases are entirely dead.

    Ultimately, women like Adriana Smith and their fetuses are inseparable and persist in a technologically defined state of in-betweenness. I’d argue that postmortem pregnancies, therefore, need new bioethical standards that center women’s beliefs about their bodies and a dignified death. This might involve recognizing pregnancy’s unique ambiguities in advance directives, questioning default treatment pathways that may require harm be done to one in order to save another, or considering multiple definitions of clinical and legal death.

    In my view, it is possible to adapt our ethical standards in a way that honors all beings in these exceptional circumstances, without privileging either “choice” or “life,” mother or fetus.

    This research was supported by a grant from The Institute for Citizens and Scholars.

    ref. Keeping brain-dead pregnant women on life support raises ethical issues that go beyond abortion politics – https://theconversation.com/keeping-brain-dead-pregnant-women-on-life-support-raises-ethical-issues-that-go-beyond-abortion-politics-258457

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Detroit restaurants identified as ‘Black-owned’ on Yelp saw a slight drop in business ratings

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Matthew Bui, Assistant Professor of Information and Digital Studies, University of Michigan

    Yelp’s Black-owned tag was designed to help business owners like Don Studvent attract more customers. His restaurant closed in 2018 after nine years in business. AP Photo/Carlos Osorio

    When the online review platform Yelp added a “Black-owned” tag in 2020, it boosted the visibility of Black-owned restaurants in Detroit. It also caused their ratings to drop, according to our recent study.

    Both local and nonlocal reviewers who showed awareness of a restaurant’s Black ownership rated restaurants 3.03 stars on average. Those who did not acknowledge Black ownership gave a rating of 3.78 stars on average. The tag seems to have caused the average rating to drop by attracting more reviewers who were aware of Black ownership.

    Why it matters

    Technology companies often introduce new features and tools to influence user behavior and make their platforms more usable.

    Although Yelp intended to support Black communities with the Black-owned tag, the design intervention was harmful to Black restaurant owners in Detroit because Yelp failed to consider platform and community-based factors that significantly shape user interactions.

    Yelp’s user base is predominantly white, educated and affluent. Making Detroit’s Black-owned restaurants more visible to Yelp users may have amplified cross-cultural interactions and frictions. For example, non-Black users sometimes mentioned “slower” and “rude” service as justifications for lower ratings. Close readings of these reviews hinted at intercultural and communicative clashes.

    Even if Black-owned restaurants businesses didn’t select the tag, they appeared in searches for “Black-owned restaurants,” in 2022 when we conducted the study and as recently as 2025. Businesses can remove the “Black-owned” tag, but Yelp doesn’t provide a way for them to opt out of search results.

    How we did our work

    To examine the local impacts of Yelp’s Black-owned tag, we collected over 250,000 Yelp reviews of Black- and non-Black-owned restaurants in Detroit and Los Angeles.

    We identified Black-owned restaurants through community-sourced lists for Detroit and Los Angeles and then generated a random sample for the non-Black-owned restaurants.

    We then identified reviews that explicitly noted “Black ownership” for closer analysis.

    Detroit’s Black-owned businesses saw a greater loss in business compared with “ownership-unreported” restaurants during the COVID-19 pandemic. This means they also potentially had more to gain from the new tag.

    We found the awareness of Black ownership on Yelp significantly increased following Yelp’s addition of the Black-owned tag in June 2020. A year after the tag was added, reviews in Detroit mentioned Black ownership 4.3% more often than a year before it was rolled out.

    Detroit Black-owned restaurants also saw a small temporary spike in their number of reviews, largely around the time Yelp added the Black-owned tag. At the same time, the restaurants’ average star ratings dropped from 3.91 to 3.88. In contrast, non-Black-owned restaurants’ ratings stayed relatively steady at 3.90.

    This metric is an aggregate of all Detroit restaurants’ Yelp reviews over their entire existence, so a .03-star rating change is small but significant.

    Even minor changes to star ratings affect the number of diners restaurants attract, their earning potential and the likelihood they will sell out of food.

    Adding obstacles in digital platforms serves to reproduce and amplify inequalities these businesses already face, rather than alleviate them. For example, Black-owned businesses have a harder time getting loans and are relatively underrepresented in Michigan as a whole.

    These findings may seem surprising given that Detroit is a majority Black city. However, Black users on Yelp are a minority. Keeping in mind the skewed user base of Yelp, we hypothesize the lower reviews for businesses featuring a Black-owned tag reflect existing racial and digital divides in the city.

    Generally, our study provides additional evidence that digital interventions are not “one-size-fits-all,” nor is digital visibility inherently positive for all businesses.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    _This article was updated to clarify how labels are added to profiles.

    This research was supported by a research grant from the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.

    Matthew Bui does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    Cameron Moy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Detroit restaurants identified as ‘Black-owned’ on Yelp saw a slight drop in business ratings – https://theconversation.com/detroit-restaurants-identified-as-black-owned-on-yelp-saw-a-slight-drop-in-business-ratings-256306

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Mexican flags flown during immigration protests bother white people a lot more than other Americans

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Edward D. Vargas, Associate Professor, School of Transborder Studies, Arizona State University

    Protesters wave the Mexican flag in Los Angeles on June 9, 2025. Luke Johnson/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

    Agents with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement conducted a series of raids throughout Los Angeles and Southern California in early June 2025, sparking protests in downtown Los Angeles and other cities, including New York, Chicago and Austin, Texas.

    Some demonstrators expressed growing frustration with ICE by showcasing the Mexican flag, which has become the defining symbol of the protests in Los Angeles.

    The use of the flag has also become the subject of intense debate in the media.

    Some outlets have depicted the flag as symbolizing ethnic pride, solidarity with immigrants and opposition to the Trump administration.

    Others have called it the “perfect propaganda” tool for Republicans and conservatives, some of whom have referred to the Mexican flag as the “confederate banner of the L.A. riots.” They point to its use as evidence of anarchy and a city taken over by immigrants.

    But what do Americans think about protesters waving the Mexican flag, and why?

    Much of our knowledge surrounding this question is based on the 2006 immigrant rights protests across the United States, which occurred in a much less politically polarized era. Additionally, a vast majority of protesters then brought U.S. flags compared with other national flags, including the Mexican flag.

    Research published in 2010 found that even though the public was more likely to be bothered by protesters waving the Mexican flag than the U.S. flag, that difference was largely absent once you divided the public into subgroups, including white people, Latinos and immigrants.

    To reexamine public attitudes toward protesters waving the Mexican flag, we conducted an online survey experiment among 10,145 U.S. adults in 2016.

    As political scientists who specialize in Latino politics and immigration-related issues, we tested how exposure to the Mexican flag versus the American flag shaped opinion about protests during Trump’s first presidential campaign in 2016.

    We found that even though much of the public continued to be less bothered by the American flag than the Mexican flag, there were also important and perhaps surprising differences in protest attitudes between white Americans and other racial and ethnic groups.

    A demonstrator holds a Mexican flag in front of law enforcement during a protest on June 13, 2025, in Los Angeles.
    AP Photo/Wally Skalij

    More or less bothered

    In the study, we randomly divided respondents into two groups: a treatment group and a control group. Respondents in the treatment group were shown an image of protesters waving a Mexican flag. Respondents in the control group were shown an image of protesters waving the U.S. flag. After viewing the image, respondents were then asked about the extent to which they supported or were bothered by the protests.

    Overall, 41% of the respondents said they were bothered by protesters waving the Mexican flag, and 28% said protesters waving the U.S. flag bothered them.

    Our results show important differences in opinion between racial and ethnic groups.

    White respondents were more likely than any other racial and ethnic group to say they were bothered by protesters waving Mexican flags. Sixty-nine percent of white respondents said they were bothered, 31 percentage points more than the average of nonwhite respondents.

    However, 51% of white respondents were also bothered by the image of protesters waving U.S. flags. By contrast, just 20% of Latinos, 33% of Black Americans and 34% of Asian Americans said they were bothered by protesters waving U.S. flags.

    Put differently, large majorities of nonwhite respondents were supportive of showing U.S. flags at protests despite their more positive views toward Mexican flags.

    What explains racial differences?

    When taking a deeper look at what causes Americans to feel bothered about protesters waving Mexican flags, some clear patterns emerge.

    On average, older Americans were more likely to be bothered relative to younger Americans. This was particularly true for Americans over 40 years of age compared with millennials, born between 1981 and 1996, and Gen Z respondents, born between 1997 and 2012.

    However, there are some nuances when examining age groups and whether they had attended a protest, march or rally in the previous year.

    Our findings suggest that older Americans who had not engaged in protests were most likely to be bothered when they saw images of protesters waving Mexican flags. Millennials and Gen Z respondents who participated in a protest were least likely to be bothered.

    Given that this issue intersects nationality, race, ethnicity, gender and citizenship status, it’s logical that these factors explained why Americans supported or opposed the use of Mexican flags at immigration protests.

    A woman carrying a flag with details of the United States and Mexican flags walks past members of the United States Marine Corps on June 14, 2025, in Los Angeles.
    Cristopher Rogel Blanquet/Getty Images

    For example, racial minorities who have a stronger sense of ethnic or racial identity were more likely to be supportive of protesters waving Mexican and U.S. flags. In other words, group identity is a strong predictor of support for protests in general, regardless of what flag is being flown.

    However, minorities who lack a sense of ethnic pride and identity were most likely to be upset when they saw others expressing their First Amendment right to peaceably assemble.

    The reality is that recent immigration protests across the country are the first time many of the Latino youth who are citizens have participated in these types of protests. Anyone under age 22 would not have memory of, or been alive during, the last large pro-immigrant protests in 2006.

    The Mexican flag represents more than nationalistic pride. It represents their parents’ heritage, hard work and their binational experience as Americans engaged in politics.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. Mexican flags flown during immigration protests bother white people a lot more than other Americans – https://theconversation.com/mexican-flags-flown-during-immigration-protests-bother-white-people-a-lot-more-than-other-americans-259004

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: The hidden cost of convenience: How your data pulls in hundreds of billions of dollars for app and social media companies

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Kassem Fawaz, Associate Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison

    Many apps and social media platforms collect detailed information about you as you use them, and sometimes even when you’re not using them. Malte Mueller/fStop via Getty images

    You wake up in the morning and, first thing, you open your weather app. You close that pesky ad that opens first and check the forecast. You like your weather app, which shows hourly weather forecasts for your location. And the app is free!

    But do you know why it’s free? Look at the app’s privacy settings. You help keep it free by allowing it to collect your information, including:

    • What devices you use and their IP and Media Access Control addresses.
    • Information you provide when signing up, such as your name, email address and home address.
    • App settings, such as whether you choose Celsius or Fahrenheit.
    • Your interactions with the app, including what content you view and what ads you click.
    • Inferences based on your interactions with the app.
    • Your location at a given time, including, depending on your settings, continuous tracking.
    • What websites or apps that you interact with after you use the weather app.
    • Information you give to ad vendors.
    • Information gleaned by analytics vendors that analyze and optimize the app.

    This type of data collection is standard fare. The app company can use this to customize ads and content. The more customized and personalized an ad is, the more money it generates for the app owner. The owner might also sell your data to other companies.

    Many apps, including the weather channel app, send you targeted advertising and sell your personal data by default.
    Jack West, CC BY-ND

    You might also check a social media account like Instagram. The subtle price that you pay is, again, your data. Many “free” mobile apps gather information about you as you interact with them.

    As an associate professor of electrical and computer engineering and a doctoral student in computer science, we follow the ways software collects information about people. Your data allows companies to learn about your habits and exploit them.

    It’s no secret that social media and mobile applications collect information about you. Meta’s business model depends on it. The company, which operates Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, is worth US$1.48 trillion. Just under 98% of its profits come from advertising, which leverages user data from more than 7 billion monthly users.




    Read more:
    How Internet of Things devices affect your privacy – even when they’re not yours


    What your data is worth

    Before mobile phones gained apps and social media became ubiquitous, companies conducted large-scale demographic surveys to assess how well a product performed and to get information about the best places to sell it. They used the information to create coarsely targeted ads that they placed on billboards, print ads and TV spots.

    Mobile apps and social media platforms now let companies gather much more fine-grained information about people at a lower cost. Through apps and social media, people willingly trade personal information for convenience. In 2007 – a year after the introduction of targeted ads – Facebook made over $153 million, triple the previous year’s revenue. In the past 17 years, that number has increased by more than 1,000 times.

    Five ways to leave your data

    App and social media companies collect your data in many ways. Meta is a representative case. The company’s privacy policy highlights five ways it gathers your data:

    First, it collects the profile information you fill in. Second, it collects the actions you take on its social media platforms. Third, it collects the people you follow and friend. Fourth, it keeps track of each phone, tablet and computer you use to access its platforms. And fifth, it collects information about how you interact with apps that corporate partners connect to its platforms. Many apps and social media platforms follow similar privacy practices.

    Your data and activity

    When you create an account on an app or social media platform, you provide the company that owns it with information like your age, birth date, identified sex, location and workplace. In the early years of Facebook, selling profile information to advertisers was that company’s main source of revenue. This information is valuable because it allows advertisers to target specific demographics like age, identified gender and location.

    And once you start using an app or social media platform, the company behind it can collect data about how you use the app or social media. Social media keeps you engaged as you interact with other people’s posts by liking, commenting or sharing them. Meanwhile, the social media company gains information about what content you view and how you communicate with other people.

    Advertisers can find out how much time you spent reading a Facebook post or that you spent a few more seconds on a particular TikTok video. This activity information tells advertisers about your interests. Modern algorithms can quickly pick up subtleties and automatically change the content to engage you in a sponsored post, a targeted advertisement or general content.

    Your devices and applications

    Companies can also note what devices, including mobile phones, tablets and computers, you use to access their apps and social media platforms. This shows advertisers your brand loyalty, how old your devices are and how much they’re worth.

    Because mobile devices travel with you, they have access to information about where you’re going, what you’re doing and who you’re near. In a lawsuit against Kochava Inc., the Federal Trade Commission called out the company for selling customer geolocation data in August 2022, shortly after Roe v Wade was overruled. The company’s customers, including people who had abortions after the ruling was overturned, often didn’t know that data tracking their movements was being collected, according to the commission. The FTC alleged that the data could be used to identify households.

    Kochava has denied the FTC’s allegations.

    Information that apps can gain from your mobile devices includes anything you have given an app permission to have, such as your location, who you have in your contact list or photos in your gallery.

    If you give an app permission to see where you are while the app is running, for instance, the platform can access your location anytime the app is running. Providing access to contacts may provide an app with the phone numbers, names and emails of all the people that you know.

    Cross-application data collection

    Companies can also gain information about what you do across different apps by acquiring information collected by other apps and platforms.

    The settings on an Android phone show that Meta uses information it collects about you to target ads it shows you in its apps – and also in other apps and on other platforms – by default.
    Jack West, CC BY-ND

    This is common with social media companies. This allows companies to, for example, show you ads based on what you like or recently looked at on other apps. If you’ve searched for something on Amazon and then noticed an ad for it on Instagram, it’s probably because Amazon shared that information with Instagram.

    This combined data collection has made targeted advertising so accurate that people have reported that they feel like their devices are listening to them.

    Companies, including Google, Meta, X, TikTok and Snapchat, can build detailed user profiles based on collected information from all the apps and social media platforms you use. They use the profiles to show you ads and posts that match your interests to keep you engaged. They also sell the profile information to advertisers.

    Meanwhile, researchers have found that Meta and Yandex, a Russian search engine, have overcome controls in mobile operating system software that ordinarily keep people’s web-browsing data anonymous. Each company puts code on its webpages that used local IPs to pass a person’s browsing history, which is supposed to remain private, to mobile apps installed on that person’s phone, de-anonymizing the data. Yandex has been conducting this tracking since 2017, while Meta began in September 2024, according to the researchers.

    What you can do about it

    If you use apps that collect your data in some way, including those that give you directions, track your workouts or help you contact someone, or if you use social media platforms, your privacy is at risk.

    Aside from entirely abandoning modern technology, there are several steps you can take to limit access – at least in part – to your private information.

    Read the privacy policy of each app or social media platform you use. Although privacy policy documents can be long, tedious and sometimes hard to read, they explain how social media platforms collect, process, store and share your data.

    Check a policy by making sure it can answer three questions: what data does the app collect, how does it collect the data, and what is the data used for. If you can’t answer all three questions by reading the policy, or if any of the answers don’t sit well with you, consider skipping the app until there’s a change in its data practices.

    Remove unnecessary permissions from mobile apps to limit the amount of information that applications can gather from you.

    Be aware of the privacy settings that might be offered by the apps or social media platforms you use, including any setting that allows your personal data to affect your experience or shares information about you with other users or applications.

    These privacy settings can give you some control. We recommend that you disable “off-app activity” and “personalization” settings. “Off-app activity” allows an app to record which other apps are installed on your phone and what you do on them. Personalization settings allow an app to use your data to tailor what it shows you, including advertisements.

    Review and update these settings regularly because permissions sometimes change when apps or your phone update. App updates may also add new features that can collect your data. Phone updates may also give apps new ways to collect your data or add new ways to preserve your privacy.

    Use private browser windows or reputable virtual private networks software, commonly referred to as VPNs, when using apps that connect to the internet and social media platforms. Private browsers don’t store any account information, which limits the information that can be collected. VPNs change the IP address of your machine so that apps and platforms can’t discover your location.

    Finally, ask yourself whether you really need every app that’s on your phone. And when using social media, consider how much information you want to reveal about yourself in liking and commenting on posts, sharing updates about your life, revealing locations you visited and following celebrities you like.


    This article is part of a series on data privacy that explores who collects your data, what and how they collect, who sells and buys your data, what they all do with it, and what you can do about it.

    Kassem Fawaz receives funding from the National Science Foundation. In the past, his research group has received unrestricted gifts from Meta and Google.

    Jack West does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    ref. The hidden cost of convenience: How your data pulls in hundreds of billions of dollars for app and social media companies – https://theconversation.com/the-hidden-cost-of-convenience-how-your-data-pulls-in-hundreds-of-billions-of-dollars-for-app-and-social-media-companies-251698

    MIL OSI