Category: Politics

MIL-OSI: PubMatic Announces First Quarter 2025 Financial Results; Board of Directors Authorizes $100M Expansion of Share Repurchase Program

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Delivered revenue and adjusted EBITDA ahead of guidance;

Revenue from omnichannel video, including CTV, grew 20% and was 40% of total revenue;

CTV revenue grew over 50% year-over-year; and

Supply Path Optimization represented a record 55%+ of total activity

NO-HEADQUARTERS/REDWOOD CITY, Calif., May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — PubMatic, Inc. (Nasdaq: PUBM), an independent technology company delivering digital advertising’s supply chain of the future, today reported financial results for the first quarter ending March 31, 2025.

“We are pleased with our Q1 performance, exceeding guidance on both the top and bottom line driven by the secular growth areas in our business. Ongoing investments in product innovation and go to market teams drove 21% year over year growth in our underlying business, with momentum carrying into April,” said Rajeev Goel, co-founder and CEO at PubMatic. “We firmly believe the current environment serves as a catalyst to accelerate the shift to programmatic and AI-driven solutions. Sell-side activation is emerging as the preferred model across the open internet as advertiser demand for more transparent, performant paths to inventory and data continues to increase. PubMatic sits at the forefront of this transformation while creating value for the entire supply chain.”

First Quarter 2025 Financial Highlights

Revenue in the first quarter of 2025 was $63.8 million, compared to $66.7 million in the same period of 2024;
Net dollar-based retention¹ was 102% for the trailing twelve-months ended March 31, 2025, compared to 106% in the comparable trailing twelve-month period a year ago;
GAAP net loss was $(9.5) million with a margin of (15)%, or $(0.20) per diluted share in the first quarter, compared to GAAP net loss of $(2.5) million with a margin of (4)%, or $(0.05) per diluted share in the same period of 2024;
Adjusted EBITDA was $8.5 million, or 13% margin, compared to $15.1 million, or a 23% margin, in the same period of 2024;
Non-GAAP net loss was $(1.8) million, or $(0.04) per diluted share in the first quarter, compared to Non-GAAP net income of $4.8 million, or $0.09 per diluted share in the same period of 2024;
Net cash provided by operating activities was $15.6 million, compared to $24.3 million in the same period of 2024;
Total cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities of $144.1 million as of March 31, 2025 with no debt;
Through March 31, 2025, used $138.2 million to repurchase 8.7 million shares of Class A common stock, representing 17% of fully diluted shares as of the program’s inception. PubMatic’s Board of Directors has authorized a $100.0 million expansion of the share repurchase program through 2026.

The section titled “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” below describes our usage of non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations between historical GAAP and non-GAAP information are contained at the end of this press release following the accompanying financial data.

Business Highlights

Omnichannel platform drives revenue in key secular growth areas

Revenue from CTV grew over 50% year-over-year. PubMatic partners with 80% of the top 30 streaming publishers.
Revenue from omnichannel video, which includes CTV, grew 20% year-over-year and represented 40% of total revenue.

PubMatic’s Sell-Side Platform continues to scale; deliver performance

Premium CTV inventory continues to scale, with new and expanded partnerships across the globe including Spectrum Reach, the advertising division of Charter Communications, TCL for live sports streaming content and the BBC’s free ad supported streaming channels.
Supply Path Optimization represented a record 55%+ of total activity on our platform in Q1 2025, up from 50% a year ago, driven by Activate, CTV Marketplace, and robust sell-side targeting capabilities. PubMatic received the The Supply Path Optimization (SPO) Award as part of AdExchanger’s 2025 Programmatic Impact Awards, highlighting the performance impact of Activate.
Activity from mid-market DSPs that specialize in performance marketing almost tripled on a year-over-year basis. These buyers are rapidly scaling ad spend on PubMatic as they prioritize access to premium supply, addressable audiences, and full-funnel sell-side solutions.
Kroger Precision Marketing (KPM) consolidated activity on PubMatic as part of their effort to improve media performance by reducing the number of supply partners by 70%. As a result of the partnership, KPM saw a 20% increase in click through rates in campaigns transacted via PubMatic.
Publishers using PubMatic’s audience curation tools see up to a 10% increase in advertising revenue, due to an increased diversity of ad buyers and higher CPMs.

Launched upgraded Gen AI buyer platform

This end-to-end platform combines proprietary supply-side intelligence with AI-powered buying tools. It delivers efficiency gains and superior outcomes for advertisers, agencies and curators, while streamlining every stage of the media buying process—from audience and inventory discovery and forecasting to curation, activation, and performance optimization.
Offers ad buyers direct access to nearly the entire open internet – approximately 1,950 premium publishers, privacy-safe audience data from 190 data partners, and over 829 billion daily ad impressions.

Owned and operated infrastructure drives operational efficiencies

Infrastructure optimization initiatives combined with limited capex drove nearly 75 trillion impressions processed in Q1 2025, an increase of 29% over Q1 2024.
Cost of revenue per million impressions processed decreased 20% on a trailing twelve month period, as compared to the prior period.

“We delivered a strong first quarter and our 36th consecutive quarter of adjusted EBITDA profitability. Looking to the second half of the year, based on the strong momentum we are seeing in our underlying business, combined with our go-to-market and innovation investments, we expect our underlying revenues to continue growing 15%+,” said Steve Pantelick, CFO at PubMatic. “Additionally, we have implemented a prudent operational plan that will allow us to continue investing behind the fastest growing programmatic opportunities, while also protecting our profitability and balance sheet. This, coupled with our durable business model, gives us confidence that we can successfully navigate the current environment and be well positioned for future market share gains.”

Financial Outlook

Our outlook assumes that general market conditions do not significantly deteriorate as it relates to current macroeconomic and geopolitical conditions.

Accordingly, we estimate the following for the second quarter of 2025:

Revenue to be between $66 million to $70 million, inclusive of the impact from one of our top DSP buyers that revised its auction approach in mid 2024.
Adjusted EBITDA to be in the range of $9 million to $12 million, representing approximately a 17% margin at the midpoint. Adjusted EBITDA expectation assumes a negative foreign currency exchange impact predominantly from Euro and Pound Sterling expenses.

Although we provide guidance for adjusted EBITDA, we are not able to provide guidance for net income, the most directly comparable GAAP measure. Certain elements of the composition of GAAP net income, including stock-based compensation expenses, are not predictable, making it impractical for us to provide guidance on net income or to reconcile our adjusted EBITDA guidance to net income without unreasonable efforts. For the same reason, we are unable to address the probable significance of the unavailable information.

Conference Call and Webcast details

PubMatic will host a conference call to discuss its financial results on Tuesday, May 8, 2025 at 1:30 p.m. Pacific Time (4:30 p.m. Eastern Time). A live webcast of the call can be accessed from PubMatic’s Investor Relations website at https://investors.pubmatic.com. An archived version of the webcast will be available from the same website after the call.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

In addition to our results determined in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), including, in particular operating income (loss), net cash provided by operating activities, and net income (loss), we believe that adjusted EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA margin, non-GAAP net income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss) per diluted share and free cash flow, each a non-GAAP measure, are useful in evaluating our operating performance. We define adjusted EBITDA as net income (loss) adjusted for stock-based compensation expense, depreciation and amortization, interest income, and benefit from income taxes. Adjusted EBITDA margin represents adjusted EBITDA calculated as a percentage of revenue. We define non-GAAP net income (loss) as net income (loss) adjusted for stock-based compensation expense and adjustments for income taxes. We define non-GAAP free cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities reduced by purchases of property and equipment and capitalized software development costs.

In addition to operating income (loss) and net income (loss), we use adjusted EBITDA, non-GAAP net income (loss), and free cash flow as measures of operational efficiency. We believe that these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors for period to period comparisons of our business and in understanding and evaluating our operating results for the following reasons:

Adjusted EBITDA and non-GAAP net income (loss) are widely used by investors and securities analysts to measure a company’s operating performance without regard to items such as stock-based compensation expense, depreciation and amortization, interest expense, and benefit from income taxes that can vary substantially from company to company depending upon their financing, capital structures and the method by which assets were acquired; and,
Our management uses adjusted EBITDA, non-GAAP net income (loss), and free cash flow in conjunction with GAAP financial measures for planning purposes, including the preparation of our annual operating budget, as a measure of operating performance or, in the case of free cash flow, as a measure of liquidity, and the effectiveness of our business strategies and in communications with our board of directors concerning our financial performance; and adjusted EBITDA provides consistency and comparability with our past financial performance, facilitates period-to-period comparisons of operations, and also facilitates comparisons with other peer companies, many of which use similar non-GAAP financial measures to supplement their GAAP results.

Our use of non-GAAP financial measures has limitations as an analytical tool, and you should not consider them in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of our financial results as reported under GAAP. Some of these limitations are as follows:

Adjusted EBITDA does not reflect: (a) changes in, or cash requirements for, our working capital needs; (b) the potentially dilutive impact of stock-based compensation; or (c) tax payments that may represent a reduction in cash available to us;
Although depreciation and amortization expense are non-cash charges, the assets being depreciated and amortized may have to be replaced in the future, and adjusted EBITDA does not reflect cash capital expenditure requirements for such replacements or for new capital expenditure requirements; and
Non-GAAP net income (loss) does not include: (a) the potentially dilutive impact of stock-based compensation; and (b) income tax effects for stock-based compensation

Because of these and other limitations, you should consider adjusted EBITDA, non-GAAP net income, and free cash flow along with other GAAP-based financial measures, including net income (loss) and cash flow from operating activities, and our GAAP financial results.

Forward Looking Statements

This press release contains “forward-looking statements” regarding our future business expectations, including our guidance relating to our revenue and adjusted EBITDA for the second quarter of 2025 and capex for the full year 2025, our expectations regarding our total addressable market, future market growth, and our ability to gain market share. These forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations and assumptions regarding our business, the economy and other future conditions and may differ materially from actual results due to a variety of factors including: our dependency on the overall demand for advertising and the channels we rely on; our existing customers not expanding their usage of our platform, or our failure to attract new publishers and buyers; our ability to maintain and expand access to spend from buyers and valuable ad impressions from publishers; the rejection of the use of digital advertising by consumers through opt-in, opt-out or ad-blocking technologies or other means; our failure to innovate and develop new solutions that are adopted by publishers; the war between Ukraine and Russia and the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine, and the related measures taken in response by the global community; the impacts of inflation, tariffs and recessionary fears as well as fiscal tightening, changes in the interest rate environment and continuing volatility in global capital markets; global macroeconomic uncertainty; limitations imposed on our collection, use or disclosure of data about advertisements; the lack of similar or better alternatives to the use of third-party cookies, mobile device IDs or other tracking technologies if such uses are restricted; any failure to scale our platform infrastructure to support anticipated growth and transaction volume; liabilities or fines due to publishers, buyers, and data providers not obtaining consents from consumers for us to process their personal data; any failure to comply with laws and regulations related to data privacy, data protection, information security, and consumer protection; and our ability to manage our growth. Moreover, we operate in a competitive and rapidly changing market, and new risks may emerge from time to time. For more information about risks and uncertainties associated with our business, please refer to the “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Risk Factors” sections of our SEC filings, including but not limited to, our annual report on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, copies of which are available on our investor relations website at https://investors.pubmatic.com and on the SEC website at www.sec.gov. Additional information will also be set forth in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. All information in this press release is as of May 8, 2025. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, except as may be required by law.

About PubMatic

PubMatic is an independent technology company maximizing customer value by delivering digital advertising’s supply chain of the future. PubMatic’s sell-side platform empowers the world’s leading digital content creators across the open internet to control access to their inventory and increase monetization by enabling marketers to drive return on investment and reach addressable audiences across ad formats and devices. Since 2006, PubMatic’s infrastructure-driven approach has allowed for the efficient processing and utilization of data in real time. By delivering scalable and flexible programmatic innovation, PubMatic improves outcomes for its customers while championing a vibrant and transparent digital advertising supply chain.


CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (In thousands) (unaudited)

	March 31, 2025			December 31, 2024
ASSETS
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents	$	101,811		$	100,452
Marketable securities		42,315			40,135
Accounts receivable, net		349,123			424,814
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		12,018			10,145
Total current assets		505,267			575,546
Property, equipment and software, net		54,386			58,522
Operating lease right-of-use assets		42,575			44,402
Acquisition-related intangible assets, net		3,889			4,284
Goodwill		29,577			29,577
Deferred tax assets		29,619			24,864
Other assets, non-current		3,289			2,324
TOTAL ASSETS	$	668,602		$	739,519
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current liabilities
Accounts payable	$	323,611		$	386,602
Accrued liabilities		20,309			26,365
Operating lease liabilities, current		6,241			5,843
Total current liabilities		350,161			418,810
Operating lease liabilities, non-current		38,649			39,538
Other liabilities, non-current		4,191			3,908
TOTAL LIABILITIES		393,001			462,256
Stockholders’ equity
Common stock		6			6
Treasury stock		(150,409	)		(146,796	)
Additional paid-in capital		286,471			275,304
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(366	)		(636	)
Retained earnings		139,899			149,385
TOTAL STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY		275,601			277,263
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY	$	668,602		$	739,519


CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (In thousands, except per share data) (unaudited)

	Three Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024
Revenue	$	63,825		$	66,701
Cost of revenue⁽¹⁾		25,588			25,424
Gross profit		38,237			41,277
Operating expenses:⁽¹⁾
Technology and development		8,772			7,960
Sales and marketing		26,799			24,815
General and administrative		14,569			14,027
Total operating expenses		50,140			46,802
Operating loss		(11,903	)		(5,525	)
Interest income		1,593			2,564
Other income (expense), net		(1,014	)		258
Loss before income taxes		(11,324	)		(2,703	)
Benefit from income taxes		(1,838	)		(249	)
Net loss	$	(9,486	)	$	(2,454	)

Basic and diluted net loss per share of Class A and Class B stock	$	(0.20	)	$	(0.05	)
Weighted-average shares used to compute net loss per share attributable to common stockholders:
Basic		48,346			50,039
Diluted		48,346			50,039

⁽¹⁾Stock-based compensation expense includes the following:


STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION EXPENSE (In thousands) (unaudited)

	Three Months Ended March 31,
		2025		2024
Cost of revenue	$	474	$	437
Technology and development		1,585		1,441
Sales and marketing		3,463		3,238
General and administrative		4,176		3,995
Total stock-based compensation expense	$	9,698	$	9,111


CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS (In thousands) (unaudited)

	Three Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024
CASH FLOW FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
Net loss	$	(9,486	)	$	(2,454	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		11,676			11,212
Stock-based compensation		9,698			9,111
Deferred income taxes		(4,754	)		(4,667	)
Accretion of discount on marketable securities		(454	)		(1,234	)
Non-cash operating lease expense		1,928			1,690
Other		(223	)		(1	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		75,691			72,184
Prepaid expenses and other assets		5,681			(196	)
Accounts payable		(62,578	)		(58,444	)
Accrued liabilities		(11,287	)		(1,784	)
Operating lease liabilities		(590	)		(1,380	)
Other liabilities, non-current		319			257
Net cash provided by operating activities		15,621			24,294
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Purchases of property and equipment		(1,441	)		(801	)
Capitalized software development costs		(6,880	)		(7,231	)
Purchases of marketable securities		(15,307	)		(34,336	)
Proceeds from maturities of marketable securities		13,559			38,500
Net cash used in investing activities		(10,069	)		(3,868	)
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Payment of business combination indemnification claims holdback		—			(2,148	)
Proceeds from exercise of stock options		563			939
Principal payments on finance lease obligations		(35	)		(32	)
Payments to acquire treasury stock		(5,000	)		(17,500	)
Net cash used in financing activities		(4,472	)		(18,741	)
NET INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS		1,080			1,685
Effect of foreign currency on cash		279			—
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS – Beginning of period		100,452			78,509
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS – End of period	$	101,811		$	80,194


RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES (In thousands, except per share amounts) (unaudited)

	Three Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024
Reconciliation of net loss:
Net loss	$	(9,486	)	$	(2,454	)
Add back (deduct):
Stock-based compensation		9,698			9,111
Depreciation and amortization		11,676			11,212
Interest income		(1,593	)		(2,564	)
Benefit from income taxes		(1,838	)		(249	)
Adjusted EBITDA	$	8,457		$	15,056
Revenue	$	63,825		$	66,701
Adjusted EBITDA margin		13	%		23	%


	Three Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024
Reconciliation of net loss per share:
Net loss	$	(9,486	)	$	(2,454	)
Add back (deduct):
Stock-based compensation		9,698			9,111
Adjustment for income taxes		(2,055	)		(1,886	)
Non-GAAP net income (loss)	$	(1,843	)	$	4,771
GAAP diluted EPS	$	(0.20	)	$	(0.05	)
Non-GAAP diluted EPS	$	(0.04	)	$	0.09
GAAP weighted average shares outstanding—diluted		48,346			50,039
Non-GAAP weighted average shares outstanding—diluted		48,346			55,006

Reported GAAP diluted loss and Non-GAAP diluted loss per share for the three months ended March 31, 2025, and reported GAAP diluted loss per share for the three months ended March 31, 2024 were calculated using basic share count. Non-GAAP diluted earnings per share for the three months ended March 31, 2024 was calculated using diluted share count which includes approximately 5 million shares of dilutive securities related to employee stock awards.


SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION COMPUTATION OF FREE CASH FLOW, A NON-GAAP MEASURE (In thousands) (unaudited)

	Three Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024
Reconciliation of cash provided by operating activities:
Net cash provided by operating activities	$	15,621		$	24,294
Less: Purchases of property and equipment		(1,441	)		(801	)
Less: Capitalized software development costs		(6,880	)		(7,231	)
Free cash flow	$	7,300		$	16,262

^¹ Net dollar-based retention is calculated by starting with the revenue from publishers in the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2024 (Prior Period Revenue). We then calculate the revenue from these same publishers in the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2025 (Current Period Revenue). Current Period Revenue includes any upsells and is net of contraction or attrition, but excludes revenue from new publishers. Our net dollar-based retention rate equals the Current Period Revenue divided by Prior Period Revenue. Net dollar-based retention rate is an important indicator of publisher satisfaction and usage of our platform, as well as potential revenue for future periods

The MIL Network –

May 9, 2025

MIL-OSI: Microchip Technology Announces Financial Results For Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2025

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

For the quarter ended March 31, 2025

Net sales of $970.5 million, declined 5.4% sequentially and 26.8% from the year ago quarter. The midpoint of our guidance provided on February 6, 2025 was net sales of $960.0 million.
On a GAAP basis: gross profit of 51.6%; operating loss of $100.3 million and 10.3% of net sales; net loss attributable to common stockholders of $156.8 million; and loss of $0.29 per diluted share. Our guidance provided on February 6, 2025 was for GAAP loss per diluted share of $0.24 to $0.14 and did not include the restructuring charges that we announced on March 3, 2025 or the preferred stock dividend related to our mandatory convertible preferred stock financing in March 2025.
On a Non-GAAP basis: gross profit of 52.0%; operating income of $136.0 million and 14.0% of net sales; net income of $61.4 million; and EPS of $0.11 per diluted share. Our guidance provided on February 6, 2025 was for Non-GAAP EPS per diluted share of $0.05 to $0.15.
Returned approximately $244.8 million to stockholders in the March quarter through dividends.
Quarterly dividend on common stock declared for the June quarter of 45.5 cents per share.

For fiscal year 2025

Net sales of $4.402 billion decreased 42.3% over the prior year.
On a GAAP basis: gross profit of 56.1%; operating income of $296.3 million; net loss attributable to common stockholders of $2.7 million, adversely impacted by purchase accounting adjustments associated with our previous acquisitions, restructuring charges and the preferred stock dividend related to our mandatory convertible preferred stock financing in March 2025 and loss of $0.01 per diluted share.
On a Non-GAAP basis: gross profit of 57.0%; operating income of $1.078 billion and 24.5% of net sales; net income of $708.8 million and EPS of $1.31 per diluted share.
Paid down $356.2 million of total debt and returned $1.066 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases.

CHANDLER, Ariz., May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — – (NASDAQ: MCHP) – Microchip Technology Incorporated, a leading provider of smart, connected, and secure embedded control solutions, today reported results for the three months and fiscal year ended March 31, 2025.

Steve Sanghi, Microchip’s CEO and President commented that “Our March quarter revenue of $970.5 million exceeded the midpoint of our guidance, and we believe marks the bottom of this prolonged industry down cycle for Microchip. The decisive actions we have taken under our nine-point-plan are enhancing our operational capabilities through more efficient manufacturing, improving inventory management, and a renewed strategic focus. As we move forward from a challenging fiscal year, we believe Microchip is better positioned to capitalize on growth opportunities as market conditions evolve.”

Mr. Sanghi added, “A key highlight this quarter has been our inventory reduction strategy, with overall inventory dollars down $62.8 million, distribution inventory days reduced by 4 days to 33 days, and inventory days on our balance sheet decreased by 15 days from levels at December 31, 2024. We expect even more substantial inventory reduction in the June quarter as our manufacturing optimization actions are near completion.”

Eric Bjornholt, Microchip’s Chief Financial Officer, said, “During the quarter, we executed multiple financial actions that strengthened our balance sheet. These included reducing our total net debt by roughly $1.30 billion with a mandatory convertible preferred offering. We also amended and extended our revolving line of credit with more favorable terms and financial flexibility. Our financing actions are helping to maintain our investment grade rating. We believe these strategic financial moves, alongside our disciplined cost management initiatives, position us well to navigate current market challenges while maintaining financial flexibility for future growth.”

Rich Simoncic, Microchip’s Chief Operating Officer, said, “Our strategic initiatives continue to deliver value across markets, with our new Switchtec PCIe switches, advanced touchscreen controllers, and AI Coding software assistant demonstrating our commitment to innovation. By expanding our offerings in atomic clock technology, enhancing our microprocessors, and expanding our 10Base-T1S solutions, we believe we are well-positioned to address emerging opportunities in automotive, industrial, and e-mobility markets while accelerating our customers’ development cycles.”

Mr. Sanghi concluded, “In the March 2025 quarter, we achieved our first positive book-to-bill ratio in nearly three years; and we have clearly reached an inflection point. Additionally, our bookings in the month of April were higher than any month in the March quarter. Balancing this with geopolitical concerns and the non-quantifiable impact of tariffs, we expect our net sales in the June 2025 quarter to be between $1.02 billion and $1.07 billion. Our focus is on translating the momentum we are seeing in our business into enhanced shareholder value while maintaining our dividend commitment as we return to growth.”

The following table summarizes Microchip’s reported results for the three months and fiscal year ended March 31, 2025.

	Three Months Ended March 31, 2025⁽¹⁾				Twelve Months Ended March 31, 2025⁽¹⁾
Net sales	$970.5				$4,401.6
	GAAP	%	Non-GAAP⁽²⁾	%	GAAP	%	Non-GAAP⁽²⁾	%
Gross profit	$501.1	51.6%	$504.6	52.0%	$2,467.9	56.1%	$2,509.8	57.0%
Operating (loss) income	$(100.3)	(10.3)%	$136.0	14.0%	$296.3	6.7%	$1,078.0	24.5%
Other expense	$(68.0)		$(64.9)		$(257.4)		$(252.2)
Income tax (benefit) provision	$(13.7)		$9.7		$39.4		$117.0
Net (loss) income	$(154.6)		$61.4		$(0.5)		$708.8
Dividends on preferred stock	$(2.2)		—		$(2.2)		—
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders	$(156.8)	(16.2)%	$61.4	6.3%	$(2.7)	(0.1)%	$708.8	16.1%
Diluted net (loss) income per common share	$(0.29)		$0.11		$(0.01)		$1.31

_{⁽¹⁾ In millions, except per share amounts and percentages of net sales.}
_{⁽²⁾ See the “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of this release.}

Net sales for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 were $970.5 million, down 26.8% from net sales of $1.326 billion in the prior year’s fourth fiscal quarter.

GAAP net loss attributable to common stockholders for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 was $156.8 million, or $0.29 per diluted share, down from GAAP net income attributable to common stockholders of $154.7 million, or $0.28 per diluted share, in the prior year’s fourth fiscal quarter. For the fourth quarters of fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2024, GAAP results were adversely impacted by amortization of acquired intangible assets associated with our previous acquisitions. The fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 GAAP results were adversely impacted by the restructuring charges that were announced on March 3, 2025 and the preferred stock dividend related to our mandatory convertible preferred stock financing in March 2025.

Non-GAAP net income for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 was $61.4 million, or $0.11 per diluted share, down from non-GAAP net income of $310.3 million, or $0.57 per diluted share, in the prior year’s fourth fiscal quarter. For the fourth quarters of fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2024, our non-GAAP results exclude the effect of share-based compensation, restructuring charges, expenses related to our acquisition activities (including intangible asset amortization, severance, and other restructuring costs, and legal and other general and administrative expenses associated with acquisitions including legal fees and expenses for litigation and investigations related to our Microsemi acquisition), professional services associated with certain legal matters, losses on the settlement of debt, and dividends on preferred stock. For the fourth quarters of fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2024, our non-GAAP income tax expense is presented based on projected cash taxes for the applicable fiscal year, excluding transition tax payments under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. A reconciliation of our non-GAAP and GAAP results is included in this press release.

Net sales for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2025 were $4.402 billion, a decrease of 42.3% from net sales of $7.634 billion in the prior fiscal year.

GAAP net loss attributable to common stockholders for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2025 was $2.7 million, or $0.01 per diluted share, a decrease from net income of $1.907 billion, or $3.48 per diluted share in the prior fiscal year. Fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2024, GAAP net loss and GAAP net income results were significantly adversely impacted by amortization of acquired intangible assets associated with our previous acquisitions and loss on debt settlement associated with our debt refinancing activities. The fiscal 2025 GAAP net loss was adversely impacted by the restructuring charges that were announced on March 3, 2025, cybersecurity incident expenses and the preferred stock dividend related to our mandatory convertible preferred stock financing in March 2025.

Non-GAAP net income for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2025 was $708.8 million, a decrease of 73.7% from net income of $2.698 billion in the prior fiscal year. Non-GAAP earnings per diluted share for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2025 were $1.31, a decrease of 73.4% from the $4.92 per diluted share in the prior fiscal year. See the “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of this release.

Microchip announced today that its Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend on its common stock of 45.5 cents per share, which is payable on June 5, 2025 to stockholders of record on May 22, 2025. The Microchip Board also declared a quarterly cash dividend on its 7.50% Series A Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock of $16.875 per share (which represents $0.8438 per depositary share) which is payable on June 15, 2025 to stockholders of record on June 1, 2025.

First Quarter Fiscal Year 2026 Outlook:

The following statements are based on current expectations. These statements are forward-looking, and actual results may differ materially.

	Microchip Consolidated Guidance
Net Sales	$1.020 to $1.070 billion
	GAAP⁽⁵⁾	Non-GAAP Adjustments⁽¹⁾	Non-GAAP⁽¹⁾
Gross Profit	51.2% to 53.2%	$9.8 to $10.8 million	52.2% to 54.2%
Operating Expenses⁽²⁾	49.3% to 51.1%	$166.1 to $170.1 million	33.4% to 34.8%
Operating Income	0.2% to 3.9%	$175.9 to $180.9 million	17.4% to 20.8%
Other Expense, net	$53.2 to $54.8 million	$(0.2) to $0.2 million	$53.0 to $55.0 million
Income Tax (Benefit) Provision	$(5.3) to $(1.7) million⁽³⁾	$20.0 to $22.0 million	$14.7 to $20.3 million⁽⁴⁾
Net (loss) income	$(47.9) to $(9.8) million	$155.7 to $159.0 million	$107.8 to $149.2 million
Dividends on preferred stock	$(27.8) million	$27.8 million	—
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders	$(75.7) to $(37.6) million	$183.5 to $186.8 million	$107.8 to $149.2 million
Diluted Common Shares Outstanding	Approximately 538.9 million shares	31.4 to 32.4 million shares	Approximately 570.3 to 571.3 million shares
Diluted net (loss) per common share	$(0.15) to $(0.07)	$0.33	$0.18 to $0.26

_{⁽¹⁾ See the “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of this release for information regarding our non-GAAP guidance.}
_{⁽²⁾ We are not able to estimate the amount of certain Special Charges and Other, net that may be incurred during the quarter ending June 30, 2025. Therefore, our estimate of GAAP operating expenses excludes certain amounts that may be recognized as Special Charges and Other, net in the quarter ending June 30, 2025.}
_{⁽³⁾ The forecast for GAAP tax expense excludes any unexpected tax events that may occur during the quarter, as these amounts cannot be forecasted.}
_{⁽⁴⁾ Represents the expected cash tax rate for fiscal 2026, excluding any transition tax payments associated with the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.}
_{⁽⁵⁾ Our GAAP guidance excludes the impact of any potential charges related to our ongoing evaluation of restructuring activities.}

Capital expenditures for the quarter ending June 30, 2025 are expected to be between $20 million and $25 million. Capital expenditures for all of fiscal 2026 are expected to be at or below $100 million. Consistent with the slowing macroeconomic environment in fiscal 2025, we have paused most of our factory expansion actions and reduced our planned capital investments through fiscal 2026. However, we are adding capital equipment to selectively expand our production capacity and add research and development equipment.

Under the GAAP revenue recognition standard, we are required to recognize revenue when control of the product changes from us to a customer or distributor. We focus our sales and marketing efforts on creating demand for our products in the end markets we serve and not on moving inventory into our distribution network. We also manage our manufacturing and supply chain operations, including our distributor relationships, towards the goal of having our products available at the time and location the end customer desires.

Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures: Our non-GAAP adjustments, where applicable, include the effect of share-based compensation, restructuring charges, expenses related to our acquisition activities (including intangible asset amortization, severance, and other restructuring costs, and legal and other general and administrative expenses associated with acquisitions including legal fees and expenses for litigation and investigations related to our Microsemi acquisition), professional services associated with certain legal matters, losses on the settlement of debt, and dividends on preferred stock. For the fourth quarters of fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2024, our non-GAAP income tax expense is presented based on projected cash taxes for the fiscal year, excluding transition tax payments under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

We are required to estimate the cost of certain forms of share-based compensation, including restricted stock units, and our employee stock purchase plan, and to record a commensurate expense in our income statement. Share-based compensation expense is a non-cash expense that varies in amount from period to period and is affected by the price of our stock at the date of grant. The price of our stock is affected by market forces that are difficult to predict and are not within the control of management. Our other non-GAAP adjustments are either non-cash expenses, unusual or infrequent items, or other expenses related to transactions. Management excludes all of these items from its internal operating forecasts and models.

We are using non-GAAP operating expenses in dollars, including non-GAAP research and development expenses and non-GAAP selling, general and administrative expenses, non-GAAP other expense, net, and non-GAAP income tax rate, which exclude the items noted above, as applicable, to permit additional analysis of our performance.

Management believes these non-GAAP measures are useful to investors because they enhance the understanding of our historical financial performance and comparability between periods. Many of our investors have requested that we disclose this non-GAAP information because they believe it is useful in understanding our performance as it excludes non-cash and other charges that many investors feel may obscure our underlying operating results. Management uses non-GAAP measures to manage and assess the profitability of our business and for compensation purposes. We also use our non-GAAP results when developing and monitoring our budgets and spending. Our determination of these non-GAAP measures might not be the same as similarly titled measures used by other companies, and it should not be construed as a substitute for amounts determined in accordance with GAAP. There are limitations associated with using these non-GAAP measures, including that they exclude financial information that some may consider important in evaluating our performance. Management compensates for this by presenting information on both a GAAP and non-GAAP basis for investors and providing reconciliations of the GAAP and non-GAAP results.

Generally, gross profit fluctuates over time, driven primarily by the mix of products sold and licensing revenue; variances in manufacturing yields; fixed cost absorption; wafer fab loading levels; costs of wafers from foundries; inventory reserves; pricing pressures in our non-proprietary product lines; and competitive and economic conditions. Operating expenses fluctuate over time, primarily due to net sales and profit levels.

Diluted Common Shares Outstanding can vary for, among other things, the trading price of our common stock, the vesting of restricted stock units, the potential for incremental dilutive shares from our convertible debentures and our mandatory convertible preferred stock (additional information regarding our share count is available in the investor relations section of our website under the heading “Supplemental Information”), and repurchases or issuances of shares of our common stock. The diluted common shares outstanding presented in the guidance table above assumes an average Microchip stock price in the June 2025 quarter between $45 and $55 per share (however, we make no prediction as to what our actual share price will be for such period or any other period).

MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (in millions, except per share amounts)

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Net sales	$	970.5		$	1,325.8		$	4,401.6		$	7,634.4
Cost of sales		469.4			535.9			1,933.7			2,638.7
Gross profit		501.1			789.9			2,467.9			4,995.7

Research and development		255.2			240.3			983.8			1,097.4
Selling, general and administrative		152.0			161.8			617.7			734.2
Amortization of acquired intangible assets		122.6			151.2			490.9			605.4
Special charges (income) and other, net		71.6			(16.9	)		79.2			(12.3	)
Operating expenses		601.4			536.4			2,171.6			2,424.7

Operating (loss) income		(100.3	)		253.5			296.3			2,571.0

Other expense, net		(68.0	)		(53.8	)		(257.4	)		(205.1	)
(Loss) income before income taxes		(168.3	)		199.7			38.9			2,365.9
Income tax (benefit) provision		(13.7	)		45.0			39.4			459.0
Net (loss) income		(154.6	)		154.7			(0.5	)		1,906.9
Dividends on preferred stock		(2.2	)		—			(2.2	)		—
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders	$	(156.8	)	$	154.7		$	(2.7	)	$	1,906.9

Basic net (loss) income per common share	$	(0.29	)	$	0.29		$	(0.01	)	$	3.52
Diluted net (loss) income per common share	$	(0.29	)	$	0.28		$	(0.01	)	$	3.48

Basic common shares outstanding		538.2			538.9			537.3			542.0
Diluted common shares outstanding		538.2			544.8			537.3			548.0

MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (in millions)

ASSETS
	March 31,		March 31,
	2025		2024
Cash and short-term investments	$	771.7	$	319.7
Accounts receivable, net		689.7		1,143.7
Inventories		1,293.5		1,316.0
Other current assets		236.4		233.6
Total current assets		2,991.3		3,013.0

Property, plant and equipment, net		1,183.7		1,194.6
Other assets		11,199.6		11,665.6
Total assets	$	15,374.6	$	15,873.2

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$	1,155.1	$	1,520.0
Current portion of long-term debt		—		999.4
Total current liabilities		1,155.1		2,519.4

Long-term debt		5,630.4		5,000.4
Long-term income tax payable		633.4		649.2
Long-term deferred tax liability		33.8		28.8
Other long-term liabilities		843.6		1,017.6

Stockholders’ equity		7,078.3		6,657.8
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	15,374.6	$	15,873.2

MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES
RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP MEASURES
(in millions, except per share amounts and percentages; unaudited)

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP GROSS PROFIT TO NON-GAAP GROSS PROFIT

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Gross profit, as reported	$	501.1		$	789.9		$	2,467.9		$	4,995.7
Share-based compensation expense		3.5			5.4			21.8			25.6
Cybersecurity incident expenses		—			—			20.1			—
Other manufacturing adjustments		—			4.3			—			4.3
Non-GAAP gross profit	$	504.6		$	799.6		$	2,509.8		$	5,025.6
GAAP gross profit percentage		51.6	%		59.6	%		56.1	%		65.4	%
Non-GAAP gross profit percentage		52.0	%		60.3	%		57.0	%		65.8	%

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT EXPENSES TO NON-GAAP RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT EXPENSES

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Research and development expenses, as reported	$	255.2		$	240.3		$	983.8		$	1,097.4
Share-based compensation expense		(25.6	)		(23.3	)		(104.6	)		(94.3	)
Other adjustments		—			—			—			(0.5	)
Non-GAAP research and development expenses	$	229.6		$	217.0		$	879.2		$	1,002.6
GAAP research and development expenses as a percentage of net sales		26.3	%		18.1	%		22.4	%		14.4	%
Non-GAAP research and development expenses as a percentage of net sales		23.7	%		16.4	%		20.0	%		13.1	%

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP SELLING, GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES TO NON-GAAP SELLING, GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Selling, general and administrative expenses, as reported	$	152.0		$	161.8		$	617.7		$	734.2
Share-based compensation expense		(11.6	)		(14.1	)		(54.0	)		(57.6	)
Cybersecurity incident expenses		—			—			(1.3	)		—
Other adjustments		—			(0.8	)		(7.3	)		(1.3	)
Professional services associated with certain legal matters		(1.4	)		(0.3	)		(2.5	)		(1.5	)
Non-GAAP selling, general and administrative expenses	$	139.0		$	146.6		$	552.6		$	673.8
GAAP selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of net sales		15.7	%		12.2	%		14.0	%		9.6	%
Non-GAAP selling, general and administrative expenses as a percentage of net sales		14.3	%		11.1	%		12.6	%		8.8	%

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP OPERATING EXPENSES TO NON-GAAP OPERATING EXPENSES

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Operating expenses, as reported	$	601.4		$	536.4		$	2,171.6		$	2,424.7
Share-based compensation expense		(37.2	)		(37.4	)		(158.6	)		(151.9	)
Cybersecurity incident expenses		—			—			(1.3	)		—
Other adjustments		—			(0.8	)		(7.3	)		(1.8	)
Professional services associated with certain legal matters		(1.4	)		(0.3	)		(2.5	)		(1.5	)
Amortization of acquired intangible assets ⁽¹⁾		(122.6	)		(151.2	)		(490.9	)		(605.4	)
Special charges (income) and other, net		(71.6	)		16.9			(79.2	)		12.3
Non-GAAP operating expenses	$	368.6		$	363.6		$	1,431.8		$	1,676.4
GAAP operating expenses as a percentage of net sales		62.0	%		40.5	%		49.3	%		31.8	%
Non-GAAP operating expenses as a percentage of net sales		38.0	%		27.4	%		32.5	%		22.0	%

_{⁽¹⁾ Amortization of acquired intangible assets consists of core and developed technology and customer-related acquired intangible assets in connection with business combinations. Such charges are excluded for purposes of calculating certain non-GAAP measures.}

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP OPERATING (LOSS) INCOME TO NON-GAAP OPERATING INCOME

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Operating (loss) income, as reported	$	(100.3	)	$	253.5		$	296.3		$	2,571.0
Share-based compensation expense		40.7			42.8			180.4			177.5
Cybersecurity incident expenses		—			—			21.4			—
Other adjustments		—			0.8			7.3			1.8
Professional services associated with certain legal matters		1.4			0.3			2.5			1.5
Other manufacturing adjustments		—			4.3			—			4.3
Amortization of acquired intangible assets⁽¹⁾		122.6			151.2			490.9			605.4
Special charges (income) and other, net		71.6			(16.9	)		79.2			(12.3	)
Non-GAAP operating income	$	136.0		$	436.0		$	1,078.0		$	3,349.2
GAAP operating (loss) income as a percentage of net sales	(10.3) %				19.1	%		6.7	%		33.7	%
Non-GAAP operating income as a percentage of net sales		14.0	%		32.9	%		24.5	%		43.9	%

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP OTHER EXPENSE, NET TO NON-GAAP OTHER EXPENSE, NET

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Other expense, net, as reported	$	(68.0	)	$	(53.8	)	$	(257.4	)	$	(205.1	)
Loss on settlement of debt		1.4			—			1.7			12.2
Loss on available-for-sale investments		1.7			—			3.5			—
Non-GAAP other expense, net	$	(64.9	)	$	(53.8	)	$	(252.2	)	$	(192.9	)
GAAP other expense, net, as a percentage of net sales	(7.0) %			(4.1) %			(5.8) %			(2.7) %
Non-GAAP other expense, net, as a percentage of net sales	(6.7) %			(4.1) %			(5.7) %			(2.5) %

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP INCOME TAX (BENEFIT) PROVISION TO NON-GAAP INCOME TAX PROVISION

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Income tax (benefit) provision as reported	$	(13.7	)	$	45.0		$	39.4		$	459.0
Income tax rate, as reported		8.1	%		22.5	%		101.3	%		19.4	%
Other non-GAAP tax adjustment		23.4			26.9			77.6			(0.3	)
Non-GAAP income tax provision	$	9.7		$	71.9		$	117.0		$	458.7
Non-GAAP income tax rate		13.6	%		18.8	%		14.2	%		14.5	%

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP NET (LOSS) INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON STOCKHOLDERS AND GAAP DILUTED NET (LOSS) INCOME PER COMMON SHARE TO NON-GAAP NET INCOME AND NON-GAAP DILUTED NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders, as reported	$	(156.8	)	$	154.7		$	(2.7	)	$	1,906.9
Dividends on preferred stock		2.2			—			2.2			—
Share-based compensation expense		40.7			42.8			180.4			177.5
Cybersecurity incident expenses		—			—			21.4			—
Other adjustments		—			0.8			7.3			1.8
Professional services associated with certain legal matters		1.4			0.3			2.5			1.5
Other manufacturing adjustments		—			4.3			—			4.3
Amortization of acquired intangible assets		122.6			151.2			490.9			605.4
Special charges (income) and other, net		71.6			(16.9	)		79.2			(12.3	)
Loss on settlement of debt		1.4			—			1.7			12.2
Loss on available-for-sale investments		1.7			—			3.5			—
Other non-GAAP tax adjustment		(23.4	)		(26.9	)		(77.6	)		0.3
Non-GAAP net income	$	61.4		$	310.3		$	708.8		$	2,697.6
GAAP net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders as a percentage of net sales	(16.2)%				11.7	%	(0.1)%				25.0	%
Non-GAAP net income as a percentage of net sales		6.3	%		23.4	%		16.1	%		35.3	%
Diluted net (loss) income per common share, as reported	$	(0.29	)	$	0.28		$	(0.01	)	$	3.48
Non-GAAP diluted net income per common share	$	0.11		$	0.57		$	1.31		$	4.92
Diluted common shares outstanding, as reported		538.2			544.8			537.3			548.0
Diluted common shares outstanding non-GAAP		543.5			544.8			542.5			548.0

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP DILUTED COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING TO NON-GAAP DILUTED COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING

	Three Months Ended March 31,		Twelve Months Ended March 31,
	2025	2024	2025	2024
Diluted common shares outstanding, as reported	538.2	544.8	537.3	548.0
Dilutive effect of RSUs⁽¹⁾	2.7	—	4.0	—
Dilutive effect of 2015 Senior Convertible Debt⁽¹⁾	—	—	0.1	—
Dilutive effect of 2017 Senior Convertible Debt⁽¹⁾	0.3	—	0.5	—
Dilutive effect of preferred stock⁽¹⁾	2.3	—	0.6	—
Diluted common shares outstanding non-GAAP	543.5	544.8	542.5	548.0

_{⁽¹⁾The non-GAAP adjustment includes the impact that is anti-dilutive on a GAAP basis for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2025 and fiscal year ended March 31, 2025 as the Company generated a GAAP net loss in the respective periods.}

RECONCILIATION OF GAAP CASH FLOW FROM OPERATIONS TO FREE CASH FLOW

	Three Months Ended March 31,						Twelve Months Ended March 31,
		2025			2024			2025			2024
GAAP cash flow from operations, as reported	$	205.9		$	430.0		$	898.1		$	2,892.7
Capital expenditures		(14.2	)		(40.1	)		(126.0	)		(285.1	)
Free cash flow	$	191.7		$	389.9		$	772.1		$	2,607.6
GAAP cash flow from operations as a percentage of net sales		21.2	%		32.4	%		20.4	%		37.9	%
Free cash flow as a percentage of net sales		19.8	%		29.4	%		17.5	%		34.2	%

Microchip will host a conference call today, May 8, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Time) to discuss this release. This call will be simulcast over the Internet at www.microchip.com. The webcast will be available for replay until June 6, 2025.

A telephonic replay of the conference call will be available at approximately 8:00 p.m. (Eastern Time) on May 8, 2025 and will remain available until 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Time) on June 6, 2025. Interested parties may listen to the replay by dialing 201-612-7415/877-660-6853 and entering access code 13752601.

Cautionary Statement:

The statements in this release relating to our belief that this marks the bottom of this prolonged industry down cycle for Microchip, that the decisive actions we have taken are enhancing our operational capabilities through more efficient manufacturing, improving inventory management, and a renewed strategic focus, that we believe Microchip is better positioned to capitalize on growth opportunities as market conditions evolve, that we expect even more substantial inventory reduction in the June quarter as our manufacturing optimization actions are near completion, that our financing actions are helping to maintain our investment grade rating, that we believe these strategic financial moves, alongside our disciplined cost management initiatives, position us well to navigate current market challenges while maintaining financial flexibility for future growth, that our strategic initiatives continue to deliver value across markets, our commitment to innovation, that we believe we are well-positioned to address emerging opportunities in automotive, industrial, and e-mobility markets while accelerating our customers’ development cycles, that we have clearly reached an inflection point, that we expect our net sales in the June 2025 quarter to be between $1.020 billion and $1.070 billion, that our focus is on translating the momentum we are seeing on our business into enhanced shareholder value while maintaining our dividend commitment as we return to growth, our first quarter fiscal 2026 guidance for net sales and GAAP and non-GAAP gross profit, operating expenses, operating income, other expense, net, income tax (benefit) provision, net (loss) income, dividends on preferred stock, net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders, diluted common shares outstanding, diluted net (loss) per common share, capital expenditures for the June 2025 quarter and for all of fiscal 2026, adding capital equipment to selectively expand our production capacity and add research and development equipment, our belief that non-GAAP measures are useful to investors and our assumed average stock price in the June 2025 quarter are forward-looking statements made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially, including, but not limited to: any continued uncertainty, fluctuations or weakness in the U.S. and world economies (including China and Europe) due to changes in the scope and level of tariffs, interest rates or high inflation, actions taken or which may be taken by the Trump administration or the U.S. Congress, monetary policy, political, geopolitical, trade or other issues in the U.S. or internationally (including the military conflicts in Ukraine-Russia and the Middle East), further changes in demand or market acceptance of our products and the products of our customers and our ability to respond to any increases or decreases in market demand or customer requests to reschedule or cancel orders; the mix of inventory we hold, our ability to satisfy any short-term orders from our inventory and our ability to effectively manage our inventory levels; foreign currency effects on our business; changes in utilization of our manufacturing capacity and our ability to effectively manage our production levels to meet any increases or decreases in market demand or any customer requests to reschedule or cancel orders; the impact of inflation on our business; competitive developments including pricing pressures; the level of orders that are received and can be shipped in a quarter; our ability to realize the expected benefits of our long-term supply assurance program; changes or fluctuations in customer order patterns and seasonality; our ability to effectively manage our supply of wafers from third party wafer foundries to meet any decreases or increases in our needs and the cost of such wafers, our ability to obtain additional capacity from our suppliers to increase production to meet any future increases in market demand; our ability to successfully integrate the operations and employees, retain key employees and customers and otherwise realize the expected synergies and benefits of our acquisitions; the impact of any future significant acquisitions or strategic transactions we may make; the costs and outcome of any current or future litigation or other matters involving our acquisitions (including the acquired business, intellectual property, customers, or other issues); the costs and outcome of any current or future tax audit or investigation regarding our business or our acquired businesses; the impact that the CHIPS Act will have on increasing manufacturing capacity in our industry by providing incentives for us, our competitors and foundries to build new wafer manufacturing facilities or expand existing facilities; the amount and timing of any incentives we may receive under the CHIPS Act, the impact of current and future changes in U.S. corporate tax laws (including the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017); fluctuations in our stock price and trading volume which could impact the number of shares we acquire under our share repurchase program and the timing of such repurchases; disruptions in our business or the businesses of our customers or suppliers due to natural disasters (including any floods in Thailand), terrorist activity, armed conflict, war, worldwide oil prices and supply, public health concerns or disruptions in the transportation system; and general economic, industry or political conditions in the United States or internationally.

For a detailed discussion of these and other risk factors, please refer to Microchip’s filings on Forms 10-K and 10-Q. You can obtain copies of Forms 10-K and 10-Q and other relevant documents for free at Microchip’s website (www.microchip.com) or the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov) or from commercial document retrieval services.

Stockholders of Microchip are cautioned not to place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date such statements are made. Microchip does not undertake any obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements to reflect events, circumstances or new information after this May 8, 2025 press release, or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

About Microchip:

Microchip Technology Incorporated is a leading provider of smart, connected and secure embedded control solutions. Its easy-to-use development tools and comprehensive product portfolio enable customers to create optimal designs, which reduce risk while lowering total system cost and time to market. Our solutions serve approximately 109,000 customers across the industrial, automotive, consumer, aerospace and defense, communications and computing markets. Headquartered in Chandler, Arizona, Microchip offers outstanding technical support along with dependable delivery and quality. For more information, visit the Microchip website at www.microchip.com.

Note: The Microchip name and logo are registered trademarks of Microchip Technology Incorporated in the U.S.A. and other countries. All other trademarks mentioned herein are the property of their respective companies.

INVESTOR RELATIONS CONTACT:
Sajid Daudi — Head of Investor Relations….. (480) 792-7385

The MIL Network –

May 9, 2025

MIL-Evening Report: Old drains and railways are full of life. Here’s how to make the most of these overlooked green spaces

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hugh Stanford, Researcher Associate, Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University

Much of the old circular railway line in Paris, La Petite Ceinture, or Little Belt, has been turned into a public park. ldgfr photos, Shutterstock

Across Australian cities, leftover and overlooked green spaces are everywhere. Just think of all the land along stormwater drains, railway lines and vacant lots. While often dismissed as useless or unsightly, there’s a growing understanding of the value these spaces bring to cities.

These informal green spaces can support biodiversity and offer rare freedom to explore, play or connect with nature in a less controlled way than formal spaces such as parks. They also help to cool our cities.

My new research looks at how cities globally are rethinking overlooked green spaces. I identified three ways to unlock the value of these areas: leaving spaces intentionally unmanaged, supporting temporary or informal uses, or formalising them as parks or other public places. Each approach offers different benefits and challenges for cities trying to create greener, more liveable neighbourhoods.

Local councils are under increasing pressure to create more formal green space, with residents, at times, calling on councils to buy land for new parks. But let’s start with what’s already there.

1: Hands off: the case for doing less

In some cases, doing nothing can be surprisingly powerful.

When governments step back, communities and nature can step in, with potentially joyful, creative and ecologically rich results. In the Belgian capital of Brussels, for example, disused railway land, left unmanaged, has become a haven for biodiversity, offering valuable insights into how ecosystems can regenerate without human interference.

Closer to home, there are many examples of railway land being used informally as green space. One site, in the Melbourne suburb of Northcote, has become a makeshift trail used by walkers, dog owners and children on bikes. Though not officially a park, it functions like one, with its informal character fostering a sense of ownership and spontaneity among users. In the past few months, local residents have started planting native vegetation and putting up makeshift art installations, and even a swing.

But this hands-off approach has limitations. It works best where a strong sense of community, or ecological value, already exists. And while nature can bounce back in surprising ways, it often needs a helping hand.

Locals have embraced a small patch of land in a railway reserve near Dennis Station in Northcote, Melbourne.
Hugh Stanford

2. Helping out: supporting informal or temporary uses

Where informal installations already exist – such as art installations or unauthorised plantings known as guerrilla gardens – councils can support and even help grow these initiatives.

Some councils may see local-led efforts as a liability, but these efforts represent an opportunity to bring life to underused land at minimal cost. By recognising and supporting such activities, including financially, councils can empower residents to shape their own neighbourhoods in meaningful ways. This can include expanding existing installations or establishing new installations on other underused sites.

There is also benefit in local councils creating their own temporary installations such as pop-up parks. This has been shown to be an effective way to activate underused space and trial initiatives before more permanent plans are developed.

Examples include the creation of a temporary park in Ballarat Street, Yarraville in 2012. Community support for the temporary park led to the construction of a permanent park in 2014.

Local councils can offer support to communities seeking to revitalise disused green space.
Hugh Stanford

3. Stepping in: when formalising makes sense

There are times where formal intervention is warranted – for example, where land is contaminated or supports invasive weeds. In such cases, transforming a site into a fully developed park can deliver significant benefits. Land alongside a river, road or railway line, can be readily transformed into a long “linear park” with walking trails and bike paths.

In Paris, the conversion of a former industrial railway line into a linear park is a great example, attracting both locals and tourists.

Melbourne, too, has its own success in revitalising disused infrastructure. The Greening the Pipeline project in Melbourne’s west involves converting a disused sewer main into a vibrant linear park. These projects demonstrate the benefits that can be achieved from developing high-quality, permanent public green spaces from underused land.

But formalising public use of urban green space comes at a cost, financially and otherwise: a highly designed park can crowd out the quirky, unplanned character that makes many informal spaces feel special. That’s why it’s crucial to see formalising green space as one option among many, and to reserve it for sites where potential benefits justify the investment.

The Greening the Pipeline project in Melbourne’s west highlights what can be achieved.
Hugh Stanford

A call to action

If you work in urban planning or local government, resist the urge to control and replace. Look at what’s already available. Sometimes the best thing you can do is observe, step back and support. Not all public spaces need a master plan.

If you’re a resident, get out there. Start small: plant something native, or set up a swing (where safe to do so). By engaging with the green spaces already around you, you might help create your own slice of urban paradise – no land purchase required.

Start small and set up a swing, where safe to do so.
Hugh Stanford

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

– ref. Old drains and railways are full of life. Here’s how to make the most of these overlooked green spaces – https://theconversation.com/old-drains-and-railways-are-full-of-life-heres-how-to-make-the-most-of-these-overlooked-green-spaces-255736

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

May 9, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: A community-led health program in remote Arnhem land is showing promising results for First Nations locals
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Hasthi Dissanayake, Research Fellow in Indigenous Health, The University of Melbourne

The Doherty Institute

Indigenous Australians are more than twice as likely as non-Indigenous Australians to suffer from disease, particularly chronic diseases such as diabetes, heart disease and kidney disease.

The health disparities are worse in remote and very remote areas. The burden of diabetes in the remote Aboriginal population of the Northern Territory, where it affects more than one in four adults aged over 20, is among the highest in the world.

The Yolŋu (or Yolngu) people of Northeast Arnhem land, a large, remote area in the NT, maintain one of the oldest continuously living cultures in the world. They also represent one of the largest Indigenous groups in Australia.

Yet, people in these communities face the highest number of avoidable deaths in Australia, mostly from chronic disease. A diet of too much sugar, refined and processed food products, smoking and an unhealthy lifestyle contribute to this region’s health crisis.

Beginning in 2014, senior Yolŋu women in Galiwin’ku, one of the largest communities in Northeast Arnhem land, have been developing a unique diet and lifestyle change program called Hope for Health. The program has been running intermittently since then, and includes on-Country health retreats, individualised health coaching, and group classes and activities.

We recently evaluated this program. We found it offers significant benefits which could reduce chronic disease risk among the Yolŋu people.

Hope for Health participants and staff at a cooking workshop.
Hope for Health

A holistic approach

Most Yolŋu live on Aboriginal land in remote communities of various sizes and hold a deep unbroken connection to their ancestral country.

Health and wellbeing is considered a holistic concept that connects physical, social, emotional, cultural, spiritual and ecological wellbeing at both an individual and community level.

The Hope for Health program is based on the values of Margikunhamirr (making known and sharing understanding) and Goŋ-ŋthanhamirr (supporting and walking alongside each other) to empower Yolŋu to gain control of their health.

Over four months, the program focuses on giving people the knowledge to make their own lifestyle changes and choices to improve health and prevent chronic disease.

It includes:
- An on-Country health retreat: this is an immersive 12-day bush retreat focused on reconnecting with the Yolŋu tradition of living, eating, and healing from the land, and learning about the body and health.
- In-community support and mentoring: over 14 weeks following the retreat, this part of the program is focused on overcoming barriers to introducing lifestyle changes. It includes group activities for identifying healthy food options at the shops, storing and cooking fresh produce, and yarning about healthy lifestyles.
- Individual and home-based health coaching: this takes place during the retreat and afterwards in participants’ homes or places of their choosing. Health coaches explain blood test results to participants, offer education in their language and help with goal setting, such as reducing sugar consumption, smoking, or increasing exercise.
The Hope for Health program seeks to give people the knowledge they need to make their own lifestyle changes.

What we found

Together with colleagues at the Doherty Institute and other collaborators, we evaluated a Hope for Health program in the second half of 2022.

We assessed outcomes such as body weight and blood sugar levels among 55 adults before and after they took part in the program. All participants were overweight or obese at the beginning.

We recently published our findings in the Medical Journal of Australia.

By the end of the program, 52% of participants reduced their HbA1c – a measure of blood sugar – by at least 0.3%. Some 33% of participants lost at least 3% of their body weight.

Changes such as these are called “clinically significant” because they’re big enough for doctors to see real health benefits such as reduced risk of chronic disease, including diabetes and heart disease.

Other outcomes we looked at improved too. Overall, participants had smaller waist circumferences at the end, lower body-mass index, better “good” cholesterol levels, were drinking less sugary drinks, and doing more daily exercise.

Why did it work?

Behavioural change is not necessarily easy to achieve in these communities, which have a very different language and culture from mainstream Australia.

Our study is the first in remote Aboriginal communities to comprehensively evaluate a lifestyle change program with such promising results.

The study design cannot prove the intervention directly caused the changes. That is, there may have been other factors which contributed to the outcomes.

A randomised controlled trial would have provided stronger proof the program led to the health improvements we observed, but these trials can be unsuitable in remote Indigenous communities. In this study, the community was concerned delaying the program for some people would harm their health. Also, many wanted their extended family to take part, making it difficult to select a representative control group which would be needed for this type of study.

Nonetheless, our results suggest support for culturally sensitive health initiatives such as Hope for Health is crucial for reducing the burden of chronic disease in remote Indigenous communities.

We believe Hope for Health worked because it was led by Yolŋu people and is built on Yolŋu knowledge, language and culture. Education provided to remote Aboriginal people such as the Yolŋu needs to be liya-lapmarnhamirr – that is, presented in a way that brings revelation and understanding.

Hasthi Dissanayake receives or has received funding from the Medical Research Future Fund, University of Melbourne, University of Sydney, and Australian government postgraduate and research grants.

Beverley-Ann Biggs receives research funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council and Medical Research Future Fund competitive grant schemes.

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

– ref. A community-led health program in remote Arnhem land is showing promising results for First Nations locals – https://theconversation.com/a-community-led-health-program-in-remote-arnhem-land-is-showing-promising-results-for-first-nations-locals-255519
MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –
May 9, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: To split Moscow from Beijing, Trump is reviving Nixon’s ‘madman diplomacy’. It could backfire badly

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Langford, Executive Director, Security & Defence PLuS and Professor, UNSW Sydney

When United States President William McKinley advocated high‑tariff protectionism in 1896, he argued squeezing foreign competitors behind a 50% wall of duties would make America richer and safer.

That logic framed US trade debates for a generation, but it was always an economic device – not a geopolitical lever.

In 2025, Donald Trump, now the 47th US president, slapped tariffs on most imported goods to the United States, specifically targeting Chinese imports.

Yet, despite the fact he idolises McKinley, Trump’s emerging grand strategy looks less like his customs schedule and more like Richard Nixon’s “madman” diplomacy of the early 1970s.

Trump is signalling that unpredictability, not price schedules, will coerce adversaries and reorder alliances.

An image of irrational resolve

McKinley’s 1890s tariffs nearly doubled average duties, shielding domestic manufacturers but doing little to shift the global balance of power.

The lesson from these tariffs was straightforward: protectionism may enrich some sectors, but it rarely bends rivals’ strategic choices.

Trump’s first term flirted with McKinley-inspired trade wars, industrial policy and “America First” rhetoric. His second term “strategic reset” moves onto darker, Nixonian ground.

Nixon and his secretary of state, Henry Kissinger, cultivated an image of irrational resolve. They hinted they might do “anything”, even use nuclear weapons, to force concessions in Vietnam and alarm the Soviet politburo.

Nixon’s White House chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, recalled the president demanding Moscow and Hanoi see him as a man “with his hand on the nuclear button”.

The gambit dovetailed with a bold diplomatic inversion. By opening to Mao Zedong’s China, Nixon sought to isolate the Soviet Union.

Trump’s ‘reverse Nixon’ efforts

Half a century later, Trump appears to be running the tape backward.

Rather than prying China from Russia, he is testing whether Moscow can be prised from Beijing.

In early April, he imposed a blanket 54% tariff on Chinese goods – yet exempted Russia, Cuba and North Korea from the harshest duties.

The White House has simultaneously floated selective sanctions relief for Moscow if Vladimir Putin shows “flexibility” on Ukraine.

Trump’s boosters call the manoeuvre a “reverse Nixon”: befriend the weaker adversary to hem in the stronger.

Al-Jazeera recently reported senior US officials and analysts believe deepening ties with Russia could splinter the Sino‑Russian axis that has unnerved US strategists for years.

But Foreign Affairs warns that even if Washington dangled lavish incentives, Putin would “play Washington and Beijing off each other” rather than choose sides.

Australia’s Strategic Policy Institute is blunter: the idea of splitting the pair is “a delusion”.

Nor is the madman pose guaranteed to intimidate. Scholars note Nixon’s bluff worked only when coupled with painstaking back‑channel diplomacy; the façade of irrationality still required a coherent end‑game.

Trump’s record of erratic statements on NATO, sudden tariff escalations and social media outbursts risks convincing adversaries that chaos is the message, not the method.

Success would require discipline

Yet, the strategic prize is real.

A durable Sino‑Russian alignment forces Washington to split resources across two theatres, complicates sanctions enforcement, and gives Beijing access to Russian hydrocarbons and military technologies.

Even a partial wedge – Moscow adopting neutrality in a potential Indo‑Pacific crisis, for instance – would lighten America’s load and disadvantage China.

Can Trump craft a credible offer? Tariff exemptions and the hint of sanctions relief are carrots; resumed arms‑control talks and guarantees of Russian equities in a post‑war Ukraine settlement could sweeten the pot.

The sticks are clear: escalating tariffs and technology bans on China, plus renewed US gas exports aimed at undercutting Sino‑Russian energy deals.

The fact CIA Director John Ratcliffe called China the “top national security threat” in his confirmation hearings earlier this year – relegating Russia to a lesser threat – underscores the hierarchy.

Still, success would require disciplined messaging and allied buy‑in, traits not often associated with madman theatrics.

If European and Indo‑Pacific partners suspect Washington will mortgage Ukraine’s security or trade their markets for a fleeting Moscow détente, unity will fray.

For Australia, the stakes are immense

For Canberra, the calculus is stark.

Australia’s primary challenge is a more assertive China, not a distant Russia.

If Trump could drive even a hairline crack between Moscow and Beijing, the Indo‑Pacific balance would tilt in favour of the US and its allies.

A Russia preoccupied with Europe or simply unwilling to share sensitive missile and space technologies would deprive China of critical enablers.

Conversely, a bungled “reverse Nixon” strategy could embolden both autocracies.

Should Putin benefit from US tariff exemptions and sanctions relief while deepening defence ties with Beijing — as recent drone and satellite deals suggest – Australia would face a sharper, more integrated adversarial bloc.

The lesson, for Australia, is to hedge: continue deepening AUKUS technology sharing, accelerate long‑range strike acquisition, and tighten diplomatic coordination with Japan, India and ASEAN states.

For Australia, perched on Asia’s faultline, the stakes are immense. A successful wedge would ease pressure on the “first‑island chain” – the chain of strategic islands that stretches from Japan through Taiwan, the Philippines and Indonesia – and give Canberra precious strategic depth.

A failed gambit risks confronting Australian forces with a tandem of nuclear‑armed revisionists (Russia and China) emboldened by US miscalculation.

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

– ref. To split Moscow from Beijing, Trump is reviving Nixon’s ‘madman diplomacy’. It could backfire badly – https://theconversation.com/to-split-moscow-from-beijing-trump-is-reviving-nixons-madman-diplomacy-it-could-backfire-badly-255878

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

May 9, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: Some Reddit users just love to disagree, new AI-powered troll-spotting algorithm finds

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marian-Andrei Rizoiu, Associate Professor in Behavioral Data Science, University of Technology Sydney

ginger_polina_bublik/Shutterstock

In today’s fractured online landscape, it is harder than ever to identify harmful actors such as trolls and misinformation spreaders.

Often, efforts to spot malicious accounts focus on analysing what they say. However, our latest research suggests we should be paying more attention to what they do – and how they do it.

We have developed a way to identify potentially harmful online actors based solely on their behavioural patterns – the way they interact with others – rather than the content they share. We presented our results at the recent ACM Web Conference, and were awarded Best Paper.

Beyond looking at what people say

Traditional approaches to spotting problematic online behaviour typically rely on two methods. One is to examine content (what people are saying). The other is to analyse network connections (who follows whom).

These methods have limitations.

Users can circumvent content analysis. They may code their language carefully, or share misleading information without using obvious trigger words.

Network analysis falls short on platforms such as Reddit. Here, connections between users aren’t explicit. Communities are organised around topics rather than social relationships.

We wanted to find a way to identify harmful actors that couldn’t be easily gamed. We realised we could, focusing on behaviour – how people interact, rather than what they say.

Teaching AI to understand human behaviour online

Our approach uses a technique called inverse reinforcement learning. This is a method typically used to understand human decision-making in fields such as autonomous driving or game theory.

We adapted this technology to analyse how users behave on social media platforms.

Behavioural analysis could help the fight against the growing problem of online misinformation.
Tero Vesalainen/Shutterstock

The system works by observing a user’s actions, such as creating new threads, posting comments and replying to others. From those actions it infers the underlying strategy or “policy” that drives their behaviour.

In our Reddit case study, we analysed 5.9 million interactions over six years. We identified five distinct behavioural personas, including one particularly notable group – “disagreers”.

Meet the ‘disagreers’

Perhaps our most striking result was finding an entire class of Reddit users whose primary purpose seems to be to disagree with others. These users specifically seek out opportunities to post contradictory comments, especially in response to disagreement, and then move on without waiting for replies.

The “disagreers” were most common in politically-focused subreddits (forums focused on particular topics) such as r/news, r/worldnews, and r/politics. Interestingly, they were much less common in the now-banned pro-Trump forum r/The_Donald despite its political focus.

This pattern reveals how behavioural analysis can uncover dynamics that content analysis might miss. In r/The_Donald, users tended to agree with each other while directing hostility toward outside targets. This dynamic may explain why traditional content moderation has struggled to address problems in such communities.

Soccer fans and gamers

Our research also revealed unexpected connections. Users discussing completely different topics sometimes displayed remarkably similar behavioural patterns.

We found striking similarities between users discussing soccer (on r/soccer) and e-sports (on r/leagueoflegends).

This similarity emerges from the fundamental nature of both communities. Soccer and e-sports fans engage in parallel ways: they passionately support specific teams, follow matches with intense interest, participate in heated discussions about strategies and player performances, celebrate victories, and dissect defeats.

Despite their differences, fans of soccer and the online multiplayer battle game League of Legends behave in very similar ways online.
Vasyl Shulga/Shutterstock

Both communities foster strong tribal identities. Users defend their favoured teams while critiquing rivals.

Whether debating Premier League tactics or League of Legends champions, the underlying interaction patterns – the timing, sequence and emotional tone of responses – remain consistent across these topically distinct communities.

This challenges conventional wisdom about online polarisation. While echo chambers are often blamed for increasing division, our research suggests behavioural patterns can transcend topical boundaries. Users may be divided more by how they interact than what they discuss.

Beyond troll detection

The implications of this research extend well beyond academic interest. Platform moderators could use behavioural patterns to identify potentially problematic users before they’ve posted large volumes of harmful content.

Unlike content moderation, behavioural analysis does not depend on understanding language. It is hard to evade, since changing one’s behavioural patterns requires more effort than adjusting language.

The approach could also help design more effective strategies to counter misinformation. Rather than focusing solely on the content, we can design systems that encourage more constructive engagement patterns.

For social media users, this research offers a reminder that how we engage online – not just what we say – shapes our digital identity and influences others.

As online spaces continue to grapple with manipulation, harassment and polarisation, approaches that consider behavioural patterns alongside content analysis may offer more effective solutions for fostering healthier online communities.

Marian-Andrei Rizoiu receives funding from the Advanced Strategic Capabilities Accelerator, the Australian Department of Home Affairs, the Defence Innovation Network, and the National Science Centre, Poland.

Lanqin Yuan and Philipp Schneider do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Some Reddit users just love to disagree, new AI-powered troll-spotting algorithm finds – https://theconversation.com/some-reddit-users-just-love-to-disagree-new-ai-powered-troll-spotting-algorithm-finds-255879

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: Statement by Prime Minister Carney on the election of His Holiness Pope Leo XIV

Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

Today, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, issued the following statement on the election of His Holiness Pope Leo XIV:

“I join Catholics in Canada and around the world in congratulating Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost on his election as Pope. The white smoke rising above the Sistine Chapel signals the beginning of a new papacy – a moment of renewal, hope, and unity for more than a billion faithful worldwide. This is a historic moment for the Catholic community and for all those who look to the Vatican for guidance.

“Canadians offer best wishes to His Holiness Pope Leo XIV as he begins his papacy. At a time of profound global challenges, may his pontificate be marked by wisdom, discernment, a deep commitment to common good, and dignity of all.

“Canada looks forward to working with His Holiness to build a world guided by solidarity, justice, and sustainability.”

MIL OSI Canada News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: How Donald Trump’s assault on universities echoes earlier American conservative ideas

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Michael Williams, Professor of International Politics, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

Fifty years ago, the American philosopher and conservative thinker James Burnham wrote his most infamous book, The Suicide of the West: An Essay on the Meaning and Destiny of Liberalism.

Burnham argued that liberalism — which he associated with unbridled individualism and excessive belief in human progress — was eroding the foundations of the West’s social orders and, equally importantly, its geopolitical power.

In an ironic twist, it’s not liberals ushering in the decline of America in contemporary times. Burnham’s acolytes in Donald Trump’s administration are busy doing that work.

Influence on the American right

It is easy to recognize Burnham’s ideas in the arguments and actions of the Trump administration.

In both The Suicide of the West and his previous 1941 bestseller, The Managerial Revolution, Burnham argued that liberalism’s individualism weakened social bonds and national allegiance. At the same time, it promoted the rise of a new class of experts that eroded democracy and individual rights under the guise of acting for the common good.

This “new class” of highly educated, managerial elites had come to dominate virtually all aspects of life, from business and bureaucracy to commerce, culture and education.

Ruling through their claims to expertise, Burnham argued that these elites spread relativistic liberal values that undermined social cohesion and national confidence, sapping the West’s ability to define and defend its fundamental values.

If these trends continued, he warned, the West would not long survive. Burnham exercised an important influence on the American right from the 1950s through the 1970s, and near the end of his life received the Presidential Medal of Freedom from Ronald Reagan. Yet by the 1990s, his ideas had fallen out of fashion and few remembered his warnings.

Rediscovered by radical conservatives

Recently, however, Burnham’s provocative ideas have resurfaced as one of the most important intellectual lineages underpinning American radical conservatism and its attacks on “elite institutions.”

In his writings, and those of his followers such as Samuel Francis, a range of political and intellectual figures have found the ideological ammunition needed to launch their crusade against liberalism in order to save the West — or in the case of the U.S., to “Make America Great Again.”

Read more:
Why the radical right has turned to the teachings of an Italian Marxist thinker

JD Vance’s attack on Europe’s democratic credentials, Elon Musk’s DOGE determination to “deconstruct” the administrative state and the Trump administration’s assaults on elite universities all reflect Burnhamite ideas.

Risk bringing about America’s decline

There is considerable irony in this situation. Most obviously, Burnham was wrong about the self-inflicted death of the West. Contrary to his predictions, liberalism did not lead to the erosion of western global power.

Far from collapsing, the United States and its allies fought the Cold War to a victorious conclusion and by the turn of the 20th century emerged with a power and dominance that Burnham could scarcely have imagined. Liberalism was the reigning ideology. American and western commerce, culture, science and technology dominated the world.

Yet the greatest irony is that Burnham’s followers risk bringing about the very situation he sought to avoid – the decline of America and its dominant status.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the attack on elite universities, where no one should not be misled by charges of antisemitism.

Important as addressing antisemitism is, this framing distracts from the ways that the right’s attack on universities are part of its wider assault the foundations of “new class” power.

Tech leadership, geopolitical dominance

In this broader campaign, leading illiberal zealots in the Trump administration are pursuing policies that will damage the foundations of American power far more than liberalism ever did.

Most obviously, the attacks on universities threaten U.S. technological leadership, since research universities remain an indispensable site of basic research, innovation and next-generation training — something especially vital at a time when the country’s leadership in these areas is challenged in ways unseen for nearly half a century.

Read more:
Three scientists speak about what it’s like to have research funding cut by the Trump administration

At the same time, assaults on academic freedom threaten the considerable cultural power and prestige that, as Burnham was well aware, are vital areas of geopolitical struggle.

Finally, these policies undermine the American ability to attract the best and the brightest from around the world — a capacity that has long underpinned its dominance in science and innovation, and ultimately its global influence.

Diminished intellectual capital

One might be tempted to say: fine, if America no longer values its intellectual capital, other countries can reap the benefit by attracting the expertise it shuns. To some degree, this may be true.

But no western country or group of countries – such as the EU – possesses the institutional research capacity, network density and depth of funding found until now in the U.S.

At best, a more fragmented, diffuse and less impactful situation is likely to occur, with America weakened and the benefits gained by others unlikely to make up the balance. The West as a whole is likely to emerge weaker rather than stronger.

Geopolitical decline

Recognizing these negative outcomes does not require treating elite universities as paragons of virtue or viewing higher education as beyond reproach. Nor are today’s Burnhamites completely delusional. Increased inequality, economic dislocation and the death of local industries have followed in the footsteps of liberal globalization.

Read more:
How Commonwealth universities profited from Indigenous dispossession through land grants

Cultural divides are significant, even if they are often polarized for political purposes. But addressing such issues demands serious engagement, not simplistic accusations of elite decadence and divisive political rhetoric. Crucially, it requires seeing elite (and other) universities as sources of global power as well as sites of education.

The conservative columnist Irving Kristol once said that politics is a struggle over “who owns the future.”

Materially and ideologically, Burnham’s contemporary followers are making sure that America will no longer be on the winning side of this struggle. Their efforts to “make America great again” misunderstand important parts of what made it great in the first place. The most likely outcome will be the decline, not the recovery, of America.

Michael Williams receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Rita Abrahamsen receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC)

– ref. How Donald Trump’s assault on universities echoes earlier American conservative ideas – https://theconversation.com/how-donald-trumps-assault-on-universities-echoes-earlier-american-conservative-ideas-255470

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Brownley and House Natural Resources Democrats Reject Republicans’ Plan to Sacrifice our Public Lands, Waters and Wildlife for Billionaire Tax Cuts
Source: United States House of Representatives – Julia Brownley (D-CA)
Washington, DC – On Tuesday, Congresswoman Julia Brownley (CA-26) and House Natural Resources Committee Democrats rejected House Republicans’ plan to sell off our lands, waters, and wildlife to fund tax cuts for billionaires in the Committee’s portion of the Republican reconciliation package. Democrats were united in the bipartisan opposition to a Republican amendment offered in the dead of night to sell off thousands of acres of public lands. While House Republicans remained silent, Democrats presented a unified front to protect communities, the American taxpayers, and our most cherished places.

“Republicans have launched one of the most egregious attacks on our public lands, our waters, and our health that we have ever witnessed. It hands over our national parks, forests, and precious natural resources to oil and gas corporations, putting their profits over the safety and well-being of the American people,” said Congresswoman Brownley. “In exchange for giveaways to the wealthiest polluters, American families will face higher energy costs, dirtier air and water, and more frequent environmental disasters. This is the same ‘polluters over people’ agenda that has defined the Trump Administration, where corporate greed comes first and the American people pay the price. This Republican proposal will add billions to the deficit while selling off our environment, our economy, and our future to the highest bidder. This bill is shameful, and the American people deserve better.”

“Republicans just rammed the most extreme, anti-environment legislation in American history through the Natural Resources Committee. It’s a billionaires-first, Americans-last giveaway to benefit Big Oil and polluters,” said Ranking Member Jared Huffman (CA-02). “It guts clean air and water protections, slashes funding for our national parks, and sells off, auctions off, and even allows for giving away our public lands to special interests. For the first time, Americans who simply want their voices heard on Big Oil projects on federal land will be slapped with fees for daring to protest. House Republicans not only voted in lock-step for this cartoonishly extreme bill, they refused to participate in any public debate or discussion about it. I’m sure they had plenty of discussion with their corporate polluter puppet masters, but in the only public hearing before this bill goes to the House Floor they refused to even discuss it. The American people deserve better policy and process than what they’re getting from this GOP Congress. I’m proud that Democrats showed up and fully engaged in debating and challenging this terrible bill. We fought back. And we’ll keep fighting for Americans’ basic freedoms, which include clean air, safe water, healthy communities, and a livable planet for future generations.”

“The only thing these budget gimmicks will do is drive up Big Oil profits, CEO pay, and shareholder dividends at the expense of our public lands and the American taxpayer,” said Congresswoman Yassamin Ansari (AZ-03). “We should be caring about the everyday Americans who are going to be suffering from the consequences of these decisions for years. Our constituents, who are already facing a climate crisis with heat wave after heat wave, who are getting sick from the pollution released by coal fired power plants and petrochemical facilities next door, all compounded by threats of serious cuts to Medicaid healthcare coverage.”

“House Republicans are once again putting polluters over people. But as a mother, I refuse to let my children’s future be auctioned off to Big Oil. I offered common-sense amendments that range from blocking funds to agencies that refuse to comply with the courts to stopping oil and gas drilling near schools and hospitals,” said Congresswoman Maxine Dexter (OR-03). “This bill is a giveaway to Big Oil and billionaires. My amendments demand House Republicans choose: people or polluters?”

“Instead of advancing a budget that helps address the challenges Americans are confronting, House Republicans are combining the most extreme attack on our nation’s natural resources with enormous cuts to Medicaid, Social Security, and other critical programs working families depend on every single day,” said Congresswoman Debbie Dingell (MI-06). “We should be focusing on expanding public access to federal lands, not auctioning them off. And we should be investing in our National Parks System and National Wildlife Refuges, not making it harder for Americans to visit these special places. This bill doesn’t put Americans first—it gives massive handouts to pad polluters’ pockets with no regard for the environment.”

“This is a fire sale on our federal land and waters,” said Congresswoman Sarah Elfreth (MD-03). “This bill reduces corporate fees and eliminates environmental and judicial safeguards that our constituents deserve. And, all for what? There is no guarantee that any of those resources will benefit Americans or lower the cost of energy for our taxpayers. We’ll still be exporting this oil just like before. We’ll still be importing oil to our refineries. We’re putting at real risk the natural resources and national security assets that I’ll address with my amendments. Taxpayers will once again be footing the bill for large corporations from all over the world who score a lease to pillage our land with no recourse. I believe that our taxpayers simply deserve better.”

“This bill is a giveaway to big oil and gas companies at the expense of our environment, workers, and communities,” said Congresswoman Val Hoyle (OR-04). “Instead of investing in bipartisan priorities like wildfire prevention or strengthening our coastal communities, it prioritizes polluters and weakens the very protections Americans rely on. I stand firmly against this reckless and misguided approach.”

“This bill is nothing more than a billion-dollar giveaway to corporations,” said Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernández (NM-03). “House Republicans are selling off our lands, slashing corporate royalty rates, and raising fees on clean energy—all to pay for tax breaks for billionaires. They’re making our families pay the price in higher energy bills, polluted water, and more extreme climate disasters. I offered amendments to protect Tribal sovereignty, keep revenues in oil and gas producing states like New Mexico, and block foreign adversaries from exploiting our resources. These are common sense protections—but Republicans chose to protect polluters over working families.”

“The devastating effects of climate change will cost us trillions of dollars and lead to catastrophic threats to our civilization,” said Congressman Dave Min (CA-47). “We have both a moral and economic imperative to fight back and give our children the opportunity to grow up in a world where they can breathe clean air, drink clean water, and have the freedom to chase the American dream. That’s why I led four amendments to stand up for our environment and fight back against the Trump administration.”

“The GOP is trying to pass a massive tax break to billionaires, and it will cost the American people $7 trillion on the backs of the American people and the expense of the environment,” said Congresswoman Melanie Stansbury (NM-01). “I was truly shocked when I read this reconciliation package before the Natural Resources Committee. It has mandatory oil and gas leasing, mining, and logging requirements. It gives away public lands and resources, not to the highest bidder, but to the lowest bidder. And, it takes away the rights of the American people to participate in planning, permitting, and holding bad actors accountable. That means impacts on public lands and waters without accountability. Furthermore, it is based on a completely false premise that will undermine the protection of our economy, our communities, and the environment. That’s why I am prepared to sit here as long as it takes to fight this bill.”

Background

House Republicans are squandering Americans’ money, health, and safety to pad polluters’ pockets. The House Natural Resources Committee’s portion of the Republican reconciliation package, which was pushed through without support from Committee Democrats, does the following:
- Instantly boosts big oil and gas company profits by letting them drill and frack at bargain-basement prices while robbing taxpayers blind.
- Puts polluters before people by letting the wealthy companies pay for legal immunity for inadequate environmental reviews and slapping Americans with exorbitant fees to protest oil and gas pollution.
- Slashes funding for critical and popular public services like NOAA’s coastal restoration and resilience efforts and the National Parks workforce, making it harder for Americans to protect their communities from natural hazards and visit our nation’s most scenic and inspiring places.
- Locks up 4 million acres for unprofitable coal mining – more land than the entire state of Connecticut – taking our energy policy back to the 19th century.
- Mandates dirty mining and drilling deals that will create toxic disasters in our nation’s most pristine lands and waters, permanently polluting places like the Boundary Waters and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
- Crushes clean energy development by jacking up fees for wind and solar while slashing fees for oil and coal.
- Wipes out protections for endangered species, including dooming the planet’s most endangered whale to extinction by waiving all sensible safeguards for offshore oil and gas operations.
- Sells off public lands to pay for handouts to big oil and tax cuts for billionaires – a surprise, late-night amendment paves the way for a fire sale of public lands.
Republicans had the opportunity to support common-sense safeguards and improve the bill. However, they rejected numerous Democratic amendments, including those to do the following:

Bolster essential and lifesaving public services:
- Congresswoman Brownley’s amendment (#65) redirecting funding to NOAA climate monitoring, weather forecasts, and disaster preparedness.
- Congressman Magaziner’s amendment (#213) striking recissions of IRA funds for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration investments in coastal communities and climate resilience and facilities.
- Congresswoman Leger Fernandez (#69) and Representative Hoyle’s (#70) amendments to fund wildland firefighting and fuels reduction.
- Congresswoman Randall’s amendment (#18) to fund the Bureau of Indian Education, and Congresswoman Ledger Fernandez’s amendment (#38) to fund the Indian Health Service.
Hold oil, gas, and mining companies accountable and ensure a fair return for taxpayers:
- Congresswoman Brownley’s amendment (#61) to require DOI to assess a fee on oil and gas operators to pay for the decommissioning of offshore pipelines in the event of bankruptcy.
- Congressman Min’s amendment (#44) to require DOI to increase financial assurances from oil and gas companies before reduced royalties can take effect.
- Congresswoman Ansari’s amendment to (#19) to deny new leases for oil and gas companies if they have been found liable for collusion.
- Congresswoman Stansbury’s amendment (#9) to prevent bad actor mining companies from operating on federal land if they are owned by foreign adversaries, have a history of using slave labor, or otherwise break the law.
Prevent dangerous pollution:
- Congresswoman Elfreth’s amendment (#129) to prohibit offshore drilling where the Defense Department has determined it is incompatible with military readiness, including off the coast of Virginia, other Atlantic Coast states, and the Eastern Gulf.
- Ranking Member Huffman’s amendments (#20 and #35) to protect the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Boundary Waters.
- Congresswoman Rivas’s amendment (#210) striking the rescission of funding for the Council on Environmental Quality’s environmental justice screening tool.
Stop corruption and illegal actions:
- Congresswoman Rivas’s amendment (#183) prohibiting funding for new contracts with Elon Musk’s companies until Inspectors General determine there are no conflicts of interest.
- Congresswoman Ansari’s amendment (#301) striking the text of the bill and inserting the STOCK Act 2.0, to prevent government officials from being able to trade individual stocks.
- Congresswoman Stansbury’s amendment (#150) directing funds to applicable Inspectors General to report to Congress on the impacts of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) actions on staffing, program services, funding, and data security.
Ensure healthy and accessible public lands and waters:
- Congressman Neguse’s amendment (#139) striking the language that rescinds funding National Park Service staffing.
- Congressman Soto’s amendment (#13) to redirect funding to coral reef conservation.
- Congresswoman Randall’s amendment (#144) restoring funding for the Fish and Wildlife Service fish passage restoration program.
- Congresswoman Dingell’s amendment (#82) to prohibit any recissions of funds for Great Lakes fisheries, harmful algal blooms, and resilience.
Protect Americans’ rights to provide public input:
- Congresswoman Dexter’s amendment (#15) striking protest filing fees.
- Ranking Member Huffman’s amendment (#247) striking the section creating a “pay-to-play” process for NEPA.
Advance clean and affordable energy:
- Resident Commissioner Hernández’s amendment (#201) to ensure utility-scale solar financing is implemented on schedule.
- Congressman Min’s amendment (#45) preventing lease sales until the Trump Administration’s national energy policy includes wind and solar energy.
- Congresswoman Hoyle’s amendment (#186) to ensure the recent firings at the Power Marketing Administrations will not result in a loss of power for ratepayers.
A full list of amendments offered by Committee Democrats and blocked by Republicans can be found here.

###

Issues: 119th Congress, Climate Crisis, Disaster Relief, Energy and Environment

MIL OSI USA News –
May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: What They Are Saying: Changes to New York’s Discovery Laws

Source: US State of New York

ollowing the FY26 State Budget agreement, District Attorneys, domestic violence survivor advocates, religious leaders and business groups are voicing their support for essential changes to New York’s discovery laws. Included in this year’s Budget, these discovery reforms build upon Governor Hochul’s record investments in proven crime prevention initiatives, while holding perpetrators accountable and safeguarding the right to a fair and speedy trial in New York State.

Rensselaer County District Attorney and DAASNY President-Elect and Mary Pat Donnelly said, “I am grateful to Governor Hochul for recognizing the important role which Discovery has in the efforts of prosecutors to secure justice for victims in New York State. These changes protect against technical dismissals, and the dangerous consequences of those dismissals. This is a critical investment in public safety; these changes will be effective in promoting a safer New York.”

Albany County District Attorney Lee C. Kindlon said, “I believe in pragmatic solutions to criminal justice issues, so I am grateful for Governor Hochul’s vision and leadership on Discovery reform. These common sense adjustments to the Discovery laws that the Governor fought for will help us restore justice for victims and provide us more tools to promote public safety.”

Wayne County District Attorney Christine K. Callanan said, “The original discovery legislation, while well-intentioned, had unintended consequences that allowed for gamesmanship and resulted in the dismissal of otherwise prosecutable cases. The recent reforms preserve the full disclosure of important discovery materials to defendants, ensuring transparency and fairness, while eliminating procedural loopholes that came at the cost of successful prosecutions and justice for victims. This balanced approach strengthens due process without compromising public safety or victims’ rights.”

Columbia County District Attorney Chris Liberati-Conant said, “The tweaks to the discovery law are a big win for public safety and the people of Columbia County. They uphold the core principles of justice, fairness, and transparency while bringing balance and common sense to the law. Defendants are still entitled to essentially everything in prosecutors’ files — everything they need for their defense. But these changes should end the practice of lying in wait by requiring defense counsel to confer in good faith about any discovery issues and setting a reasonable time limit on discovery motions. No longer should cases be dismissed for technical, minor violations that do not affect the defendant’s ability to prepare a defense. These changes protect crime victims while upholding defendants’ rights and ensuring swift, just, and responsible prosecution of cases. I thank the Governor for her steadfast leadership in support of these needed amendments.”

Tompkins County District Attorney Matthew Van Houten said, “It has always been critically important to provide complete disclosure of the evidence against someone accused of a crime. The changes to New York’s discovery laws continue to protect the rights of the accused while significantly reducing the chance that a case will be dismissed based upon a technicality. These changes represent a commonsense and pragmatic solution that protects the rights and safety of all New Yorkers and I am extremely pleased that this was a priority for Governor Hochul in this year’s budget.”

Ulster County District Attorney Manny Nneji said, “Discovery rules are all about achieving justice for all through a fair and transparent process. The adjustments made by Governor Hochul and our State Legislature will go a long way in eliminating the worries for victims of crime resulting from the aggressive and overzealous abuse of loopholes existing in the original discovery reforms. As a prosecutor who has dealt with these abuses firsthand in homicide cases, I am grateful to the Governor and Legislature for taking action that positively impacts victims of crime in my community.”

Westchester County District Attorney Susan Cacace said, “I am proud to stand alongside Gov. Hochul and my District Attorney colleagues in support of a Fiscal Year 2026 budget that prioritizes public safety. This is a hard-won victory, but one that was undoubtedly worth fighting for. I commend Gov. Hochul’s leadership and the efforts of everyone inside and outside government who brought these reforms over the finish line. This agreement is a win for all New Yorkers who believe crime victims deserve a meaningful chance at securing justice. Though discovery is not often in the public spotlight, it lies at the heart of the criminal justice process. For years, we operated under a status quo that yielded arbitrary disappointments and absurd results. Now, these reforms will help restore the public’s faith in our criminal justice system.”

Dutchess County District Attorney Anthony Parisi said, “As prosecutors, we are dedicated to pursuing justice fairly, ethically, and within the bounds of the law. While the 2019 discovery reforms were well-intentioned, they created significant operational challenges to our Office, and to district attorneys’ offices state-wide. We applaud Governor Hochul and our lawmakers for proposing amendments that preserve the spirit of reform while adding safeguards to prevent unjust dismissals of cases based upon minor technical errors in disclosures. These changes promote fairness by allowing proportionate remedies for procedural errors, protecting both defendants’ rights and public safety. We are happy to hear that Governor Hochul is committed to providing additional funding to district attorneys’ offices for discovery. To implement these reforms effectively, district attorneys’ offices urgently need additional resources. Investment in staffing and technology is essential to uphold these standards and ensure a just, efficient legal system.”

Village of Brightwaters Mayor and President of the Suffolk County Village Officials Association John Valdini said, “On behalf of the Villages across Suffolk County, I would like to thank Governor Hochul for standing up for the victims of crimes with the Discovery Law changes included in this year’s state budget. These necessary changes will help restore balance to our justice system, keep our communities safe and support victims throughout the legal process.”

Westhampton Beach Mayor Ralph Urban said, “Mayor Ralph Urban of Westhampton Beach strongly supports any legislation that will reduce the ‘Revolving Door’ that is currently putting a great deal of stress on our Justice and Police Departments along with putting the public at risk for encountering repeat offenders without relief.”

North Haven Village Mayor Chris Fiore said, “The recent position of the Governor’s office and the revision of the over restrictive discovery laws will proactively address recidivism and make our neighborhoods safer. There’s more to do but these are great first steps.

New York City Council Member Keith Powers said, “Safety is a top priority for all New Yorkers. While we’ve continued to see crime fall, it’s as important as ever that we give prosecutors the tools they need to bring criminals to justice. Tweaks to the state’s discovery law will hold perpetrators accountable while keeping the intention of the original 2019 reforms intact, ensuring speedy trials. I commend Governor Hochul for her work, and applaud the prosecutors who have worked so hard to achieve this agreement.”

New York City Council Member Gale A. Brewer said, “These thoughtful changes to New York’s discovery laws reflect our continued commitment to justice, fairness, and public safety. By listening to the concerns of prosecutors, advocates, and communities across the state, we’ve struck the right balance—ensuring timely access to information, protecting victims, and reinforcing our fundamental promise of due process under the law.”

Southold Town Supervisor Albert J. Krupski, Jr. said, “I am in support of New York State’s effort to change the discovery law to provide better public safety for our communities.”

Monroe County Sheriff Todd K. Baxter said, “On behalf of the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office and the communities we serve, I want to express our appreciation to Governor Hochul for her support of public safety and meaningful discovery reform. This important revision to our discovery laws helps ensure that law enforcement has the tools we need to protect our neighborhoods, while upholding the integrity of our justice system. These changes are necessary across the bail reform spectrum. We are grateful for the willingness to discuss, the willingness to improve.”

Partnership for New York City President & CEO Kathryn Wylde said, “Governor Hochul’s leadership has resulted in adjustments to the discovery law that were necessary to keep New Yorkers safe. Together with leaders Andrea Stewart Cousins and Carl Heastie, she has delivered reform that was a top priority for the city’s employers.”

Greater NY Chamber of Commerce President & CEO Mark Jaffe said, “Kathy Hochul is listening! Our members throughout NY have been frustrated by the 2019 Discovery Reforms that needed to be fixed to protect public safety. The well-meaning reforms had resulted in tens of thousands of dismissals for felony and repetitive misdemeanor cases that too often left law abiding citizens without justice. The Governor’s leadership and conviction has delivered a system that will now protect the accused without sacrificing justice for victims of crime. Again, we must thank Governor Hochul for standing up for our members and providing a safer environment for all those who live, work, and visit NY.”

Manhattan Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Jessica Walker said, “This was a very heavy lift, but the Governor got it done! This is one of those wonky issues that isn’t particularly well-known or understood but which has substantial and far-reaching impacts. It goes to the very heart of public safety and justice in New York. The Governor made a strong case, stood firm, and delivered on her promise to fix the issue. New Yorkers should all be tremendously grateful for her steady leadership.”

Staten Island Chamber of Commerce President & CEO Linda Baran said, “The adjustments to New York State’s discovery law and the investments in our justice system included in the State budget are promising steps towards improving public safety and protecting New Yorkers and business owners. The Chamber is grateful for these improvements and congratulates Governor Hochul and District Attorney McMahon for their efforts in making New York a better and safer place for businesses to thrive.”

Bronx Chamber of Commerce President Lisa Sorin said, “Retail theft continues to threaten the stability of small businesses and commercial corridors across New York City—particularly in the Bronx, where so many local entrepreneurs operate on razor-thin margins. The discovery law changes included in this year’s budget are a critical step toward restoring accountability, protecting small businesses, and making our communities safer for all residents. We commend Governor Hochul and the Legislature for advancing these thoughtful reforms and for recognizing that economic vitality and public safety must go hand in hand.”

Long Island Against Domestic Violence Executive Director Wendy Linsalata said, “LI Against Domestic Violence fully supports efforts to enhance systems that are in place to protect survivor safety and hold those that are responsible for inflicting fear and harm on their partner accountable. Changes to the discovery laws were needed to prevent the dismissal of cases and support prosecution based on the merits of the case while not infringing on the rights of offenders. These changes will provide a positive impact for survivors whom, often feel unheard and discouraged from reaching out for assistance in the future when cases are dismissed.”

Crime Victims Center Executive Director Laura A. Ahearn said, “I applaud Governor Hochul for championing these much needed changes to New York’s discovery laws. These reforms will help ensure victims on Long Island and across the state can finally seek justice based on the facts, not be denied it because of technicalities.”

SEPA Mujer Inc. Executive Director Martha Maffei said, “The strengthened discovery protections in New York State law are a vital step toward justice, ensuring that those who bravely speak up are not further endangered. For many of the immigrant women we serve, this confidentiality is not just a legal right—it’s a lifeline. These changes affirm that survivor safety and due process can coexist, and we will continue to advocate for both.”

Sanctuary for Families CEO Hon. Judy Harris Kluger said, “Governor Hochul and the Legislature have taken a vital step to ensure our justice system works for domestic violence survivors as well as defendants. For years, cases were dismissed over minor procedural errors, leaving survivors without protection and offenders without accountability. By addressing the unintended consequences of our discovery laws, these reforms will help restore survivors’ ability to seek safety and justice through the courts.”

Willow Domestic Violence Center of Greater Rochester President & CEO Meaghan de Chateauvieux said, “Governor Hochul’s proposed discovery reform is a critical step toward strengthening protections for survivors of domestic violence. By ensuring sensitive information is safeguarded and survivors are not retraumatized through the legal process, this proposal prioritizes both justice and safety. We are grateful for the Governor’s leadership and commitment to building a system that better supports those who courageously come forward.”

Brighter Tomorrows, Inc. Executive Director Dolores Kordon said, “Domestic violence victims face many obstacles in their quest for justice. Measures that create a pathway towards safety for themselves and their children is critical. Streamlining the discovery process helps to ensure fairness for victims.”

Beit Simchat Torah Senior Rabbi Emerita Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum said, “As Senior Rabbi Emerita of Congregation Beit Simchat Torah (CBST), co-founder of the New York Jewish Agenda, and a lifelong advocate for equality, I deeply appreciate Governor Hochul’s leadership in advancing these critical changes to New York’s discovery laws. The discovery amendments that the Governor and the Legislature enacted this budget honor the spirit of the 2019 reforms—protecting the rights of the accused—while addressing unintended consequences that have harmed victims. These thoughtful amendments preserve the rights of the accused and do right by victims, ensuring our justice system works for everyone it touches.”

Garment District Alliance President Barbara Blair said, “The Garment District Alliance thanks governor Hochul and the state legislature for recognizing and addressing the serious need to modify NY’s discovery laws. GDA has been a first-hand witness to a justice system compromised by opportunism with regard to discovery. Strengthening these laws are an improvement step in restoring credibility and fairness to the judicial process.”

Times Square Alliance President Tom Harris said, “We commend Governor Hochul for standing strong and delivering reforms to discovery rules for all New Yorkers so victims will no longer be denied justice for technicalities. New York still has the most transparent criminal justice system and protects the rights of the accused while making sure that New York is safe for all.”

Chinatown Partnership Executive Director Wellington Chen said, “To see and hear directly from the domestic violence advocates and victims talk about their experience and the impacts this change in New York Discovery Laws mean to them make it clear why this is so necessary and why the inscription on the pediment says it all: “the true administration of justice is the firmest form of good government.”

Village Alliance Business Improvement District Executive Director Scott Hobbs said, “We applaud Governor Hochul and the Legislature for advancing thoughtful reforms that bring fairness and accountability back to our justice system. In our community, small businesses were left vulnerable by the well-intentioned changes to the law in 2019, but the unintended consequences led to cases being dismissed on technical grounds—leaving victims without recourse and emboldening repeat offenders. These essential changes will help ensure that crimes against Greenwich Village’s small businesses are taken seriously, that victims can seek justice, and that due process remains protected for all parties.”

Staten Island Economic Development Corporation President & CEO Mike Cusick said, “I applaud Governor Hochul for her efforts to build on record crime prevention investments while safeguarding fair trials and accountability as part of the FY26 State Budget. For our small business owners, this means a justice system that works faster, protects community safety, and supports a more stable environment to live and do business on Staten Island.”

Noir et Blanc Owner Deborah Koenigsberger said, “A done deal! As she promised, Governor Kathy Hochul got it done. So grateful to our Governor who stood her ground on behalf of small businesses like mine! BRAVA Governor! Thank you for fighting with us!”

Family Services CEO Leah Feldman said, “At Family Services, we stand with victims of crime every step of the way. We thank the Governor for treating discovery reform as a human issue. Ensuring trauma-informed and survivor centered systems protects victims’ rights and promotes justice, strengthening the ability of victims to safely participate in the legal processes meant to protect them without being retraumatized.”

Citizens Crime Commission of NYC President Richard Aborn said, “At its core, the criminal justice system must be based on a careful balance. The right of an individual who has been accused of a crime to a fair and open trial is of paramount importance. The government has no greater power than to deprive some one of their liberty. Before it can exercise that power, the government must be held to a standard that ensures a just outcome. The balance is struck when the rights of the accused are carefully juxtaposed with the right of the government to fully present its evidence within constitutional and statutory bounds. With the governor’s steady leadership, the legislature has moved New York State law closer to striking that balance. The changes in the discovery law will continue to offer those accused of crimes very high levels of protection from unjust outcomes while removing obstacles that unfairly impinged on prosecutors’ ability to prove their cases. This is a classic win-win.”

Antioch Baptist Brooklyn Pastor and President of AACEO Rev. Dr. Robert M. Waterman said, “Governor Hochul’s leadership in reforming New York’s Discovery Laws strikes a balance between protecting defendants’ rights and advancing justice for victims—strengthening public safety while ensuring fairness and accountability in our legal system.”

God’s Battalion of Prayer Pastor Rev. Al Cockfield said, “Public safety is the cornerstone of the faith community and of Black and brown communities, and we are grateful for Governor Hochul’s support in keeping us safe. These changes to discovery delicately uphold transparency while targeting repeat offenders who terrorize our city. No New Yorker should be afraid to go to church or take their child to school. Today’s announcement marks a new day in our criminal justice system.”

River of Life Church Pastor Donald Mapes said, “Thank you to Governor Hochul for spearheading the much needed reforms to the Discovery Laws. Lawyers must have the time and evidence they need to better ensure victims here in the Hudson Valley and across the State have the justice they deserve.”

Women’s Equal Justice Director Jane Manning said, “These reforms will make a real difference for survivors and will reduce the number of cases dismissed for trivial technical violations. We still have more work to do, but this bill moves us forward in a powerful way. I cannot say enough how grateful we are to the Governor for standing strong to secure these very significant reforms. Without her commitment to fighting for victims and survivors, this important bill would not have been possible.”

Coalition Against Trafficking in Women Executive Director Taina Bien-Aimé said, “We applaud Governor Hochul for her unflinching commitment to stand with survivors who have endured unspeakable violence at the hands of people who should have instead loved and protected them. The Governor’s vision of justice for victims and survivors of gender-based violence has carried the day in New York with these necessary changes to the discovery law, and is an example for the country as we continue the journey toward equality, especially for women.”

Met Council on Jewish Poverty CEO David G. Greenfield said, “As the largest provider of domestic violence services in New York’s Jewish community, Met Council has seen firsthand the heartbreak when survivors summon the courage to seek justice—only to have their cases dismissed over minor procedural errors. Governor Kathy Hochul’s reforms to the state’s discovery laws directly address this injustice by ensuring that serious cases are no longer derailed by technicalities. These changes restore faith in the legal system and offer survivors a real path to safety and accountability. We applaud Governor Hochul for her unwavering commitment to protecting victims and strengthening justice for all New Yorkers.”

Urban Resource Institute CEO Nathaniel M. Fields said, “URI is grateful to Governor Hochul and the State Legislature for their work to protect survivors of domestic and gender-based violence. The deal struck on discovery strikes the right balance and will ensure that survivors can access justice and safety through the courts. As the largest provider of transitional housing for domestic violence survivors in the country, we look forward to our continued partnership to prevent harm, increase safety and reduce recidivism by investing in violence prevention and accountability work with people who have caused harm.”

Staten Island Community Board 2 Chair Fred Giunta said, “Staten Island Community Board 2 recognizes the importance of updating New York’s Discovery Laws to ensure that survivors have the necessary tools to seek justice, while also upholding the right to a fair and timely trial. These changes are vital for fostering accountability, protecting due process, and strengthening trust in our legal system. We also appreciate Governor Hochul’s commitment to this issue by allocating $135 million in next year’s budget to support its implementation.”

Westerleigh Improvement Society President Mark Anderson said, “We are pleased to hear that Governor Kathy Hochul has signed into law, commonsense changes to the discovery requirements in pending criminal cases. These changes are reasonable not only for the prosecution, but also for the defense. These new requirements create a more productive process by relieving the undue burden of providing unnecessary evidence or omitted or incorrect evidence from causing the case to be prematurely dropped. Provisions are also welcomed, that provide a timely process for challenges of the evidence, which will create an expedited defense for those charged. We are also grateful to our elected state officials and especially the efforts towards this successful legislation by District Attorney Michael McMahon.”

Richmondtown and Clarke Avenue Civic Association President Carol Donovan said, “The 2026 Discovery Laws reforms are welcomed efforts to improve the criminal justice system, and public safety overall. We want to thank Governor Hochul for including these public safety changes in the State budget.”

Port Richmond Strong North Shore Alliance Vice Chair Mario Buonviaggio said, “The critical investments in public safety and changes in the discovery laws for the 2026 State budget will ensure perpetrators are held accountable and victims of crime are not denied justice on technicalities. We thank Governor Kathy Hochul and Staten Island District Attorney Mike McMahon for these critical changes to the discovery laws that will make our local communities safer.”

Forest Regional Residents Civic Association President Neil Anastassio said, “Our civic association supports the discovery changes in the 2026 State budget secured by Governor Hochul, in partnership with our Staten Island District Attorney, which reforms timelines and procedures in criminal trials. These reforms will assure that all evidence is allowed to be considered during trials, thus protecting the rights of those accused as well as the victims of these crimes.”

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI: Canyon GBS Joins EDUCAUSE Webinar to Spotlight Practical, Compliant AI for Colleges and Universities

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Scottsdale, Arizona, May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Canyon GBS, a leader in AI-powered SaaS solutions for higher education, has announced its participation in an EDUCAUSE Industry Insights webinar titled “Unlocking AI’s Potential in Higher Ed” on Tuesday, May 13, 2025, from 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Joseph Licata, JD, Founder and CEO of Canyon GBS, will join a panel of experts to spotlight how compliant, AI-driven solutions can enhance advising, admissions, teaching, and IT operations while maintaining strict data privacy standards.

Promotional banner for the EDUCAUSE webinar “Unlocking AI’s Potential in Higher Ed,” live on May 13, 2025, featuring Joseph Licata of Canyon GBS, Dr. George Kriss of Kaskaskia College, and Austin Laird of the Gates Foundation.

As part of the EDUCAUSE Leadership Series, the webinar provides a vendor-agnostic forum where higher-education leaders can evaluate emerging technologies without product bias.

FEATURED SPEAKERS

• Joseph Licata, JD — Founder and CEO, Canyon GBS
• Dr. George Kriss — Chief Information Officer, Kaskaskia College
• Austin Laird — Sr. Program Officer, Gates Foundation

WHY ATTEND

• Learn how institutions are using AI to empower staff and improve student outcomes.
• Review governance frameworks that protect sensitive data while enabling innovation.
• Explore change-management tactics that drive rapid adoption across academic and administrative units.

BONUS RESOURCE

All registrants will receive immediate access to the AI Playbook for Higher Education Leadership, a practical guide that the panel will reference throughout the broadcast.

REGISTRATION DETAILS

The webinar is free of charge, and an EDUCAUSE profile is required to register. Those unable to attend live will automatically receive a recording after the event. More than 600 higher-education professionals have already secured their seats.

Register now: https://events.educause.edu/webinar/2025/unlocking-ais-potential-in-higher-ed

Canyon GBS® is a registered trademark of Canyon GBS LLC. EDUCAUSE® is a registered trademark of EDUCAUSE. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

About Canyon GBS

A Phoenix-based tech innovator, we develop impactful AI-powered SaaS solutions for higher education and government agencies—providing more affordable products that enable staff to excel in their daily responsibilities.

Press inquiries

Canyon GBS
https://canyongbs.com
Lindsay Consalvos
media@canyongbs.com
520-357-1351

The MIL Network –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI: Franklin Electric Announces Appointment of Jennifer L. Sherman as Chairperson; Mark Carano Elected to be a Director of the Company

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

FORT WAYNE, Ind., May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Board of Directors of Franklin Electric Co., Inc. (NASDAQ: FELE) has elected Jennifer L. Sherman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Federal Signal Corporation, as Chairperson effective as of May 2, 2025 for a term expiring at the 2026 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Ms. Sherman has been a Director of the Company since 2015. Joe Ruzynski, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, commented: “I want to congratulate Jennifer on her election as Chairperson of Franklin Electric. She knows the Company well, having served on our Board of Directors for 10 years, and I am looking forward to working closely with her to further develop and refine Franklin’s strategy.”

In addition, the Company is pleased to announce that Mark A. Carano, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of SPX Technologies, Inc. has been appointed as a director of the Company effective May 7, 2025 for a term expiring at the 2027 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Mr. Carano has served in that role since 2023. Prior thereto, Mr. Carano served as Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Insteel Industries, Inc., and Chief Financial Officer of Big River Steel LLC, following 14 years in investment banking.

Mr. Carano earned a Bachelor of Arts degree from Vanderbilt University and an MBA from Northwestern University’s Kellogg Business School.

Ms. Sherman, Franklin’s Chairperson of the Board, commented: “I have confidence that Mark’s extensive financial and manufacturing sector experience will provide a unique perspective to our deliberations. His investment banking and corporate deal-making experience will be invaluable as Franklin Electric continues to look for opportunities to grow through accretive acquisitions. I join my fellow directors in welcoming Mark to the Board and we look forward to benefitting from his leadership and expertise.”

About Franklin Electric
Franklin Electric is a global leader in the production and marketing of systems and components for the movement of water and energy. Recognized as a technical leader in its products and services, Franklin Electric serves customers worldwide in residential, commercial, agricultural, industrial, municipal, and fueling applications. Franklin Electric is proud to be recognized in Newsweek’s lists of America’s Most Responsible Companies 2024, Most Trustworthy Companies 2024, and Greenest Companies 2025; Best Places to Work in Indiana 2024; and America’s Climate Leaders 2024 by USA Today.

“Safe Harbor” Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any forward-looking statements contained herein, including those relating to market conditions or the Company’s financial results, costs, expenses or expense reductions, profit margins, inventory levels, foreign currency translation rates, liquidity expectations, business goals and sales growth, involve risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to, risks and uncertainties with respect to general economic and currency conditions, various conditions specific to the Company’s business and industry, weather conditions, new housing starts, market demand, competitive factors, changes in distribution channels, supply constraints, effect of price increases, raw material costs, technology factors, integration of acquisitions, litigation, government and regulatory actions, the Company’s accounting policies, future trends, epidemics and pandemics, and other risks which are detailed in the Company’s Securities and Exchange Commission filings, included in Item 1A of Part I of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2024, Exhibit 99.1 attached thereto and in Item 1A of Part II of the Company’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q. These risks and uncertainties may cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements made herein are based on information currently available, and the Company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

Contact:
Russ Fleeger
Franklin Electric Co., Inc.
260.824.2900

The MIL Network –

May 9, 2025

MIL-OSI: Best Online Casinos: JACKBIT Ranked As Top Online Casino Of 2025

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

LARNACA, Cyprus, May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The online gambling industry is thriving, with countless platforms competing to be recognized as the best online casinos. For players seeking the most trusted online casino, navigating this crowded landscape can be overwhelming.

Our team of experts conducted an exhaustive evaluation of over 100 online gambling sites, assessing licensing, security, game variety, bonuses, payout speeds, and customer support. After rigorous testing, JACKBIT Casino emerged as the best online casino for 2025.

JOIN JACKBIT NOW AND WIN BIG

Distinguished by its extensive game library, instant cryptocurrency transactions, and player-centric features that redefine the real casino online experience.

This comprehensive review explores why JACKBIT stands out among the best casino sites, delving into its bonuses, games, payment methods, mobile gaming, sportsbook, and responsible gambling tools. Whether you’re spinning best online slots for real money or strategizing at live dealer tables, JACKBIT offers a premium gaming experience tailored for players worldwide.

A Closer Look At The Best Online Casino: JACKBIT Casino

JACKBIT Casino has redefined excellence in online gambling, earning its place as the best online casino through innovation and quality. Launched in 2022, this new crypto casino has rapidly gained traction for its vast offerings and commitment to player satisfaction. Licensed by the Curacao Gaming Authority, JACKBIT ensures a secure and fair gaming environment, making it a legit casino online for players seeking reliability and trust.

The casino’s appeal lies in its blend of variety, speed, and privacy. With over 7,000 games from 85+ top providers like NetEnt, Evolution Gaming, and Pragmatic Play, JACKBIT caters to every gaming preference, from slots to sports betting. Its no-KYC policy for cryptocurrency users enhances anonymity, while instant withdrawals set it apart as a fast payout online casino. A user-friendly interface, vibrant design, and 24/7 multilingual support further solidify JACKBIT ’s position among top online casinos.

JACKBIT Casino – Our Favorite Best Overall Online Casino

JACKBIT Casino is our top pick for the best online casino due to its exceptional features tailored for modern players. New players are welcomed with a 30% Rakeback + 100 no-wager free spins bonus on their first deposit, providing immediate value without restrictive terms. Ongoing promotions, including weekly giveaways, a VIP Rakeback program, and Pragmatic Drops & Wins with a €2,000,000 prize pool, keep the excitement alive, making JACKBIT a standout among best online gambling sites.

The casino’s game library is a treasure trove, offering slots, table games, live dealers, and a comprehensive sportsbook. Its payment system supports over 17 cryptocurrencies, ensuring instant, fee-free transactions, alongside fiat options like Visa and Apple Pay for broader accessibility. The no-KYC policy appeals to privacy-conscious players, while 24/7 support via live chat and email ensures prompt assistance, reinforcing JACKBIT ’s reputation as a most trusted online casino.

START PLAYING WITH NO KYC REQUIREMENT

Pros And Cons Of JACKBIT Casino

To provide a balanced perspective, here are JACKBIT ’s strengths and potential drawbacks:

Pros	Cons
Over 7,000 games from 85+ providers, including the best online slots real money	No dedicated mobile app, though site is mobile-optimized
Instant cryptocurrency withdrawals, ideal for fast withdrawal casino	Some bonuses have specific game restrictions
No KYC policy enhances privacy for legit casino online play
Supports 17+ cryptocurrencies and fiat methods
24/7 multilingual support for best online casino sites
Generous bonuses, including 100 no-wager free spins

These attributes make JACKBIT a compelling choice among top-rated online casinos, though players should consider the cons based on their preferences.

How To Join JACKBIT Casino

Joining JACKBIT Casino, the best online casino, is quick and user-friendly:

Visit JACKBIT Casino: Click here to navigate to JACKBIT ’s official site.
Register: Click “Sign Up” and enter your email and password.
Skip KYC: No identity verification required for crypto users, ensuring privacy.
Deposit Funds: Choose a payment method (Bitcoin, Visa, etc.) and deposit at least $20 to claim the welcome bonus.
Claim Bonus: Receive 100 no-wager free spins automatically.
Start Playing: Explore the game library and enjoy real casino online gaming.

Ensure accurate details to avoid issues, and check bonus terms to maximize your best online casino experience.

How We Selected JACKBIT as The Best Online Casino

Our selection of the best online casinos for 2025 involved a meticulous process to ensure safety, value, and enjoyment:

Licensing and Security: We verified JACKBIT ’s Curacao license, ensuring compliance with fair play and data protection standards via SSL encryption. Provably fair games add transparency.
Bonuses and Promotions: We prioritized generous, fair bonuses. JACKBIT ’s 100 no-wager free spins and ongoing offers outshine competitors in best online real money casinos.
Game Variety: We assessed the range and quality of games, with JACKBIT ’s 7,000+ titles leading online gambling sites.
Game Providers: We confirmed partnerships with top providers like NetEnt and Evolution Gaming for the best casino sites quality.
Payment Methods: We tested transaction speeds, favoring JACKBIT ’s instant crypto payouts for fast payout online casino efficiency.
Customer Support: We evaluated responsiveness, with JACKBIT ’s 24/7 multilingual support excelling.
User Experience: We analyzed site design and mobile compatibility, ensuring a seamless top online casino experience.

JACKBIT outperformed rivals, earning its title as the best online casino for 2025.

UNLOCK YOUR 30% RAKEBACK TODAY

Best Online Casino Games At JACKBIT

JACKBIT Casino’s game library, with over 7,000 titles from 85+ providers, is a cornerstone of its status as the best online casino. Catering to diverse preferences, it offers a rich selection across multiple categories, ensuring every player finds their niche in top online casinos.

Online Slots: Over 5,000 slots, from classics like Starburst (96.09% RTP) to modern hits like Gates of Olympus (96.50% RTP), feature high RTPs, free spins, and multipliers. Progressive jackpots like Mega Moolah offer life-changing payouts, making JACKBIT a hub for the best online slots real money.
Blackjack: 100+ variants, including Classic Blackjack (0.5% house edge with strategy), Multi-Hand, and live dealer options, provide strategic depth for real casino online players.
Roulette: 80+ versions, such as European (2.7% edge), French (1.35% with La Partage), and live Lightning Roulette with multipliers, offer thrilling gameplay.
Poker: 60+ options, including Texas Hold’em, Caribbean Stud, and video poker like Jacks or Better (99.54% RTP), cater to skill-based players.
Live Dealer Games: Powered by Evolution Gaming, live blackjack, roulette, baccarat, and game shows like Crazy Time deliver immersive experiences with real-time interaction.
Craps: Dice games with low-edge bets like Pass Line (1.41%) add excitement, available in both virtual and live formats.
Instant Win Games: Titles like Aviator and Plinko offer quick, high-energy wins, appealing to casual players.
Sportsbook: Covering 140+ sports, including football, basketball, tennis, and eSports, with over 82,000 live events monthly, JACKBIT ’s sportsbook rivals dedicated betting platforms.

This diverse, high-quality library, regularly updated with new releases, ensures JACKBIT remains a leader among best online gambling sites.

Best Online Casino Payment Methods At JACKBIT

JACKBIT Casino offers a versatile payment system, balancing speed, security, and flexibility to cater to modern players at best online casino sites. Its crypto-centric approach, complemented by fiat options, ensures seamless transactions for all.

Cryptocurrencies: Supports 17+ cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Ripple, Dogecoin, Tether, Binance Coin, Monero, and more. Deposits are instant, and withdrawals process in under an hour, often within minutes, with no fees. This efficiency makes JACKBIT a top fast payout online casino. Minimum deposits start at $10 or equivalent, accessible for all budgets. Blockchain verification ensures secure, transparent transactions, ideal for legit casino online play.
Credit/Debit Cards: Visa and MasterCard are accepted for instant deposits, with a $10 minimum. Withdrawals take 1-3 days, with potential fees (1-2%) for amounts under $100, offering familiarity for non-crypto users at best online real money casinos.
Mobile Payments: Google Pay and Apple Pay provide secure, instant deposits, catering to tech-savvy players seeking convenience at top online casinos.
Bank Transfer: Suitable for larger withdrawals, with a $500 minimum and 3-5 day processing. Fees (1-3%) may apply, but it’s a secure option for high rollers.
Buy Crypto Option: Players can purchase cryptocurrencies directly on the site via third-party services, simplifying access for newcomers to crypto gambling sites.
Transaction Limits: Daily withdrawals up to €10,000, monthly up to €20,000, with higher limits for VIPs, ensuring flexibility for all players.

EXPERIENCE FAST AND SECURE PAYOUTS

Responsible Gambling At JACKBIT Casino

JACKBIT Casino prioritizes player well-being, offering robust tools to promote responsible gambling at the best online casinos:

Deposit Limits: Set daily, weekly, or monthly caps to manage spending.
Loss Limits: Restrict losses over a period to prevent chasing losses.
Wagering Limits: Control total bets to maintain disciplined play.
Session Time Limits: Limit gaming sessions to encourage breaks.
Cooling-Off Periods: Temporary account suspensions for short breaks.
Self-Exclusion: Long-term or permanent account deactivation.
Reality Checks: Periodic notifications to track play duration.

JACKBIT provides links to support organizations, ensuring players have access to professional help. These measures, mandated by its Curacao license, reinforce JACKBIT ’s status as the most trusted online casino.

Mobile Gaming Experience At JACKBIT Casino

JACKBIT Casino delivers a seamless mobile gaming experience, making it a top choice for best online casino sites on the go. While lacking a dedicated app, its HTML5-based website is fully optimized for iOS and Android devices, ensuring players can access all 7,000+ games, manage accounts, and process transactions effortlessly.

Game Accessibility: Slots, live dealers, and sports betting load quickly with crisp graphics, maintaining quality across devices.
Banking on Mobile: Instant crypto deposits and withdrawals are supported, with a user-friendly cashier interface for fast payout online casino transactions.
Navigation: Touch-optimized menus and filters allow easy game selection, enhancing the top online casino experience.
Support: 24/7 live chat is accessible on mobile, resolving the best online gambling sites queries instantly.
Performance: Fast load times and minimal lag ensure smooth gameplay, even on older devices.

The absence of an app is a minor drawback, as the mobile site’s responsiveness rivals native apps, positioning JACKBIT among top-rated online casinos for mobile users.

Sportsbook Excellence At JACKBIT Casino

JACKBIT Casino’s sportsbook is a standout feature, offering a comprehensive betting platform that rivals dedicated sportsbooks, making it the best online gambling site for sports enthusiasts. Covering over 140 sports, it provides extensive options for all players:

Sports Covered: Football (Premier League, Champions League), basketball (NBA, EuroLeague), tennis (Grand Slams, ATP), cricket, rugby, and eSports (Dota 2, CS:GO, League of Legends).
Betting Options: Over 82,000 live events and 75,000 pre-match events monthly, with bets on match outcomes, over/under, handicaps, and player props.
Live Betting: Real-time odds updates and in-play betting for dynamic wagering.
Odds: Competitive, often surpassing industry averages, with margins as low as 3-5% on major markets.
Sports Bonus: A 100% refund on a losing first bet (minimum $20) adds value for new bettors.

The sportsbook’s integration with the casino platform allows seamless switching between slots and betting, enhancing JACKBIT ’s appeal as a real casino online. Regular promotions, like boosted odds and cashback, further elevate the experience.

JACKBIT Casino Conclusion: The Best Online Casino for 2025

After an exhaustive review of online gambling sites, JACKBIT Casino stands as the best online casino for 2025. Its unparalleled game library of over 7,000 titles, from best online slots real money to live dealer games and a world-class sportsbook, caters to every player. The 100 no-wager free spins welcome bonus, weekly giveaways, and VIP Rakeback program deliver exceptional value, while instant crypto payouts and a no-KYC policy ensure speed and privacy.

Backed by a Curacao license, SSL encryption, and 24/7 multilingual support, JACKBIT offers a secure, player-centric experience. Whether you’re a slot enthusiast, table game strategist, or sports bettor, JACKBIT is the ultimate most trusted online casino for a thrilling, rewarding gaming journey.

GET 100 NO-WAGER FREE SPINS

Frequently Asked Questions

Is JACKBIT Casino safe to play at?

JACKBIT, licensed by Curacao, uses SSL encryption and provably fair games, ensuring a secure, legit casino online experience for players.

What bonuses does JACKBIT offer?

JACKBIT provides 100 no-wager free spins, weekly giveaways, and a VIP Rakeback program, boosting value at the best online casinos.

Can I play without identity verification?

Yes, JACKBIT ’s no-KYC policy allows anonymous crypto play, ideal for privacy at top online casino platforms.

What payment methods are available?

JACKBIT supports 17+ cryptocurrencies, Visa, MasterCard, and mobile payments, offering flexibility for the best casino sites.

How fast are JACKBIT withdrawals?

Crypto withdrawals process in under an hour, making JACKBIT a top fast payout online casino.

Does JACKBIT have a mobile app?

No, but its mobile-optimized site ensures seamless gaming on devices at the best online casino sites.

What games can I play at JACKBIT?

JACKBIT offers slots, table games, live dealers, and sports betting, catering to the best online gambling sites players.

Is JACKBIT ’s customer support 24/7?

Yes, JACKBIT provides round-the-clock support via live chat and email for the most trusted online casino users.

Can I bet on sports at JACKBIT?

JACKBIT ’s sportsbook covers 140+ sports with live betting, a highlight of top rated online casinos.

Why is JACKBIT the best online casino?

With 7,000+ games, instant payouts, and no KYC, JACKBIT offers an unmatched real casino online experience.

Legal Disclaimer

This content is for informational and entertainment purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or gambling advice. Information is presented “as is,” without warranties. Readers must verify compliance with local gambling laws. The publisher is not liable for losses or consequences.

Affiliate Disclosure

Some links may be affiliate links, earning a commission at no cost to you. Recommendations are objective, and partnerships do not influence content.

Email: support@JACKBIT.com

A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/7307b375-0e00-45a3-aafd-693b0e28892e

The MIL Network –

May 9, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: The attack on public broadcasting is part of a growing threat to press freedom and democracy

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Lorry-Ann Austin, Assistant Professor, Social Work and Human Services, Thompson Rivers University

In a disturbing parallel between two countries, President Donald Trump’s recent attack on the two largest public broadcasters in the United States mirrors threats to Canada’s own public broadcaster that were recently dodged by the electoral defeat of Conservative Pierre Poilievre.

These attacks are part of a larger authoritarian move to slander and disempower a free and independent press.

In the grab to reclaim power from the people, authoritarians and the oligarchs who support them recoil from criticism and dissent, demanding that all people support government positions regardless of the rationality of their claims.

While they may come for the media first, other institutions are also targeted, including those that nurture critical thinking and uphold the rule of law.

Read more:
Yale scholars’ move to Canada can prompt us to reflect on the rule of law

Essential to democracy

The news media are a key pillar of democracy and a vigilant monitor of human rights. Often identified as the Fourth Estate, the press is tasked with keeping political power in check while informing people about events beyond their own experiences. This function makes it a prime target for authoritarian assault.

Both Poilievre and Trump have long attacked the integrity of journalists as they worked to undermine public trust in the media. They both denigrate reporters and limit media accessibility.

With accusations of fake news and attempts to discredit journalists as leftist and partisan propaganda pedlars, Poilievre and Trump’s call to defund public broadcasters seems aimed at silencing criticism and obscuring oversight of their actions.

Public broadcasters like PBS, NPR and CBC/Radio-Canada provide vital links to news and life-saving information in times of crisis. They inform regions that no longer have access to local corporate news and they educate the public and strengthen its culture.

Public broadcasters receive public funding through government legislation, but make no mistake, these are not state propaganda machines as some politicians allege.

CBC/Radio-Canada, PBS and NPR are all governed by broadcasting acts within their respective nations. CBC/Radio-Canada’s editorial independence is protected by the federal Broadcasting Act. In the U.S., the federal Public Broadcasting Act assures PBS and NPR have “maximum freedom …from interference with, or control of, program content or other activities.”

These media outlets are publicly funded but their editorial independence is enshrined in law.

Tracking media coverage

My exploration of the framing practices of public broadcasters, mainstream corporate media and alternative news agencies in Canada and the U.S. lends support to the expressed independence of publicly funded broadcasters.

This research tracked press coverage of debates about sexual orientation and gender expression in schools over a 10-year period — from Trump’s initial declaration to seek the Oval Office in 2015 to his return to power in November 2024.

From an initial sample of close to 38,000 news stories, 60 were randomly selected and subjected to multimodal critical discourse analysis.

A third of these stories were produced by publicly funded news agencies. Findings suggest that while they consistently use polarizing conflict language to present debates to the public — just as corporate and alternative media outlets do — the majority of the publicly funded news accounts I examined adhered to the principles of fact-based reporting.

These principles include accuracy and objectivity in reporting as well as the inclusion of a balance of perspectives on a given event, and the maintenance of a non-partisan approach to coverage.

Only one story produced by a public broadcaster in the U.S. represented propaganda in its attempt to persuade the audience to agree with the biased argument presented within. It was an educational video debunking claims that critical race theory was being taught in schools.

None of the content produced by public broadcasters represented examples of movement journalism, which rejects objectivity in favour of activism to promote human rights and social change.

No draining on public coffers

While these findings cannot be extended to all content produced by public broadcasters, they do suggest these news agencies adhere to requirements of non-partisan coverage.

Without evidence, Poilievre and Trump claim the public broadcasters in their nations are biased against conservative politics. They also claim that they’re a drain on tax revenues, and that cutting their funding will represent significant tax savings.

This also fails to hold up to a fact check. CBC/Radio-Canada received less than 0.28 per cent of the money allocated in the 2024 federal budget. In the U.S., federal tax dollars allocated to NPR and PBS represent 0.0001 per cent of the federal budget.

Given the lack of evidence supporting accusations of partisan bias and the minuscule savings that would come from defunding, something else must be driving the assault on public broadcasting.

It’s likely no coincidence that Trump’s most recent attack on the media coincided with World Press Freedom Day. It’s a day that asserts the importance of a free and independent press in democracy, and the need to protect the ability of journalists to report the truth without fear or interference.

Lorry-Ann Austin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The attack on public broadcasting is part of a growing threat to press freedom and democracy – https://theconversation.com/the-attack-on-public-broadcasting-is-part-of-a-growing-threat-to-press-freedom-and-democracy-255855

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Miller-Meeks, Grassley Reintroduce Bill to Equip Students with Full Loan Info Before Borrowing
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks’ (IA-02)

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks (IA-01), alongside Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), has reintroduced the Know Before You Owe Federal Student Loan Act of 2025, legislation that ensures students are fully informed before taking on federal student loans.

The bill strengthens pre-loan counseling and requires students to manually confirm the amount they choose to borrow. It also mandates clear, updated disclosures throughout the borrowing period—including estimated monthly payments, projected income, and personalized financial comparisons—so students can make informed decisions and avoid over-borrowing.

“Borrowing for college is a serious commitment, not something that should be rushed into with little guidance or transparency,” said Congresswoman Miller-Meeks. “This bipartisan bill ensures students and families understand the true cost of borrowing and have the tools to make smart financial decisions before debt piles up. It’s about transparency, responsibility, and protecting future borrowers from being blindsided.”

“When it comes to college costs, we ought to focus on fixing the process on the front-end before students get in over their heads. The federal government should be offering commonsense resources to better prepare borrowers.” Said Senator Grassley. “Our Know Before You Owe Federal Student Loan Act will enhance current loan counseling requirements for higher education institutions. It will also help students decide how much they want to borrow, not just accept the maximum possible loan that’s offered. In the Senate, I’m working to help America’s next generation pursue higher education opportunities without breaking the bank.”

“Our experience requiring applicants to complete the Student Loan Game Plan tool has shown that when students are equipped with clear, accurate information, they make smarter financial decisions,” said Steve McCullough, President and CEO of Iowa Student Loan Liquidity Corporation. “Congresswoman Miller-Meeks’ Know Before You Owe bill takes that principle nationwide, empowering students to make informed choices and achieve better outcomes from college. We commend her for reintroducing this important legislation.”

The legislation comes at a time when student loan debt in the U.S. has surpassed $1.7 trillion. While some politicians push sweeping forgiveness plans, this bill focuses on up-front clarity to prevent future debt crises—giving students real numbers, not false promises.

The Know Before You Owe Act also requires quarterly loan statements even when repayment is not due, helping students track debt accumulation and understand the impact of interest over time.

Senator Grassley is leading the companion bill in the Senate. The bill is supported by members of Iowa’s congressional delegation and national advocates for student financial literacy.

Background:

The Know Before You Owe Federal Student Loan Act of 2025 will:
- Require institutions to provide personalized pre-loan counseling every year, not just once.
- Include clear comparisons of debt-to-income based on a student’s field of study.
- Require borrowers to manually confirm their loan amount before funds are disbursed.
- Provide quarterly loan updates during school and deferment to track total borrowing and interest accrual.
###

MIL OSI USA News –
May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Kaptur Statement On Announcement Of Pope Leo XIV, The First American Pope

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)

Toledo, Ohio — Today, Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (OH-09), released the following statement on the announcement of Pope Leo XIV, the first American Pope:

“As a lifelong Catholic and proud Great Laker, I am deeply moved to witness the astounding selection of Pope Leo XIV from Chicago’s South Side. Historically, he is the first American to ascend to the Papacy.

“He has given his life to shepherd community as a mendicant, serving others in the Order and Spirit of Saint Augustine. His faith, humility, working class spirit, and heartland values will inspire countless millions.

“This is a true moment of grace for our nation, our Great Lakes region, and the world. May the Saints be praised.”

# # #

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Grothman Reintroduces Bipartisan Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Glenn Grothman (R-Glenbeulah 6th District Wisconsin)

Representative Glenn Grothman (R-WI) is joined by Representative Suzan DelBene (D-WA), Mary Miller (R-IL), and Danny K. Davis (D-IL) to reintroduce the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act. This legislation will eliminate a government-imposed punishment for marriage and ease the burden of student loan debt by amending the tax code to ensure that student loan interest is tax-deductible for each spouse independently. This bill has received endorsements from the National Taxpayers Union (NTU), the Family Research Council, and Third Way.

Grothman, DelBene, Miller, and Davis are joined by six bipartisan cosponsors, including Representatives Andrew Clyde (R-GA), John Larson (D-CT), Rich McCormick (R-GA), Kevin Mullin (D-CA), David Rouzer (R-NC), and Michael Rulli (R-OH).

“The federal government has a troubling record of polices that discourage marriage, and the student loan interest deduction is no exception,” said Grothman. “This is why I’m reintroducing the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act to end the unnecessary marriage penalty on student loans that punish marriage and undermine the nuclear family. This is an initial dent on the war the federal government has waged on marriage.

“If two unmarried individuals each have student loans, they can each receive up to a $2,500 tax deduction, for a total of $5,000. However, their collective deduction is capped at $2,500 when married and filing jointly. My bill will rectify this anti-marriage provision by allowing each spouse to claim their full $2,500 deduction.

“Separately applying the $2,500 deductible for each spouse in a marriage is a common-sense approach that reduces financial stress for young couples and removes yet another government-imposed barrier to marriage. Our policies should support, not penalize, American families. While this is only an initial dent in the federal government’s war on marriage, it’s a meaningful step toward protecting the institution of marriage from unfair discrimination.”

“Higher education is a critical path to economic security,” said Davis. “Unfortunately, Americans collectively struggle under $1.77 trillion in crushing student loan debt, with an average $38,375 in federal student loans. I am proud to join my colleagues in leading this bill that would double the student loan interest deduction for married couples filing jointly. Congress must take every opportunity to ease the heavy financial burden on student loan borrowers.”

“Young couples already face numerous financial challenges, and the federal government should not add to that burden simply because they choose to build a life together,” said Miller. “Rep. Grothman’s Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act brings much-needed fairness to the current tax system and supports both fiscal responsibility and strong families.”

“Student loan debt should not prevent couples from getting married. Yet, for many Americans, the cost of the marriage penalty outweighs the benefit of marriage,” said DelBene. “While making college more affordable remains a top priority, the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act is a practical solution that would ease financial pressure on couples by ending the marriage penalty for student loan borrowers and remove an unnecessary barrier to building a future together.”

“National Taxpayers Union is proud to once again endorse the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act,” said Thomas Aiello, Senior Director of Government Affairs at NTU. “Under current law, the tax code wrongly imposes burdens on certain taxpayers depending on if they choose to marry. Thankfully, this legislation ends that penalty and corrects the unequal tax burden that exists. We applaud Rep. Grothman for his leadership on this issue and look forward to helping this legislation become law.”

“FRC is grateful to Congressman Grothman for introducing the Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act,” said the Family Research Council. “Family is the foundation of society and family starts with a husband and wife joining in marriage. Marriage should be supported in federal legislation, not penalized.”

Background Information

Currently, interest on student loan debt, both public and private, is tax deductible up to $2,500. However, current law penalizes married couples by only allowing them to take one deduction– even if both spouses would separately qualify.

The Student Loan Marriage Penalty Elimination Act will end this unfair tax treatment of student loan interest against married couples by allowing married couples filing a joint tax return to apply the $2,500 limitation on the tax deduction for student loan interest separately to each spouse, ensuring they can receive a maximum of $5,000 in deductions and eliminating the penalty they are currently paying upon getting married.

Passing this bill will end an unfair marriage penalty in the tax code and ease the burden couples face when paying off student loan debt.

-30-

U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Glenbeulah) serves the people of Wisconsin’s 6th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Congresswoman Torres Applauds Historic Election of First American Pope, Robert Francis Prevost, as Pope Leo XIV

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Norma Torres (35th District of California)

May 08, 2025

Washington, D.C. – Congresswoman Norma Torres, a proud Catholic, issued a statement of congratulations and praise following the historic election of Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost as the 267th pope of the Roman Catholic Church. The Cardinal, now Pope Leo XIV, made history as the first American to be elected to the papacy in the nearly 2,000-year-old institution:

“I am overjoyed and deeply proud to witness this historic moment in the life of the Catholic Church. Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost’s election as Pope Leo XIV is a monumental achievement for the global Catholic community, and especially for Catholics in the United States. His election breaks new ground, reflecting the global diversity and inclusiveness of the Church.”

“I look forward to seeing the ways in which Pope Leo XIV will build upon the legacy of Pope Francis and move the Church toward a future of greater unity, peace, and understanding. May his leadership inspire hope and strength among the 1.4 billion Catholics and people of all faiths across the globe.”

###

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Africa: Secretary-General’s statement on the election of Pope Leo XIV

Source: United Nations – English

extend my heartfelt congratulations to His Holiness Pope Leo XIV and Catholics around the world.

The election of a new Pope is a moment of profound spiritual significance for millions of faithful around the world, and it comes at a time of great global challenges.

Our world is in need of the strongest voices for peace, social justice, human dignity and compassion.

I look forward to building on the long legacy of cooperation between the United Nations and the Holy See – nurtured most recently by Pope Francis – to advance solidarity, foster reconciliation, and build a just and sustainable world for all.

It is rooted in the first words of Pope Leo. Despite the rich diversity of backgrounds and beliefs, people everywhere share a common goal: May peace be with all the world.

MIL OSI Africa –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Private School Settles with Justice Department to Address Discrimination Against Children with Disabilities

Source: Office of United States Attorneys

Richard G. Frohling, Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, announced that on May 8, 2025, Wisconsin Montessori Society, Inc., d/b/a Milwaukee Montessori School (MMS) agreed to injunctive relief and payment of $290,000 to resolve allegations that it failed to provide full and equal enjoyment of its educational services to children with disabilities, in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12189.

MMS is a private day school that offers pre-K through grade 8 education. Private schools, day care centers, and other places of education are generally prohibited from discriminating on the basis of disability under Title III of the ADA. Disabled individuals protected under Title III include both individuals with an actual disability—meaning “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual”—as well as individuals “regarded as having such an impairment.”

Since at least 2018, MMS has discriminated against young children with disabilities. MMS has: (1) denied, on the basis of disability, participation in its educational services to disabled children by expelling and refusing to admit them; (2) denied disabled children equal participation in MMS’s educational services by repeatedly sending them to the office, seating them separately from other students, and sending them home early because of manifestations of their disabilities; and (3) failed to make reasonable modifications for disabled children. MMS’s discriminatory actions are evidenced by the experiences of ten children described in the Settlement Agreement.

“Children with disabilities have the right to access the educational opportunities offered by private schools, including Montessori schools,” said Acting United States Richard Frohling. “This settlement is an important reminder that the ADA’s obligations extend to private schools and their treatment of students with disabilities.”

Under the settlement agreement, MMS will pay monetary damages of $240,000 to compensate aggrieved persons as well as a civil penalty of $50,000 to the United States. It also includes injunctive relief that requires monitoring and reporting, and MMS has voluntarily taken some steps to address the government’s findings.

The ADA authorizes the U.S. Department of Justice to investigate complaints and undertake periodic reviews of covered entities. The Department of Justice is also authorized to commence a civil lawsuit in federal court and to seek injunctive relief, monetary damages, and civil penalties.

Assistant United States Attorneys Lisa Yun and Nia Schmaltz represented the government in this matter. The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only; MMS does not admit liability for the allegations.

# # #

For Additional Information Contact:

Public Information Officer

Kenneth.Gales@usdoj.gov

414-297-1700

Follow us on Twitter

MIL Security OSI –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI: Kajeet Urges House to Support Schools and Libraries Counting on E-Rate Funding for Hotspots

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

MCLEAN, Va., May 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Following today’s Congressional Review Act (CRA) block of the Federal Communications Commission Wi-Fi hotspots order, which removes E-Rate funding eligibility for these devices, Kajeet®, a leading provider of managed internet solutions for education, expressed confidence the House of Representatives will recognize the profound benefits of hotspots. To continue its mission, Kajeet affirmed its commitment to honoring E-Rate pricing to help schools and libraries secure critical connectivity.

While the CRA reversal presents a setback to efforts aimed at funding off-campus student Wi-Fi hotspots through E-Rate, Kajeet encourages the House to carefully consider the compelling data demonstrating the effectiveness and safety of managed hotspots. It is an undeniable reality that over 70% of students rely on out-of-school internet access for homework, underscoring the critical need for reliable home connectivity. The pandemic starkly illuminated the deep disparities that exist, with countless families depending on public Wi-Fi at locations like libraries, hospitals, and even fast-food restaurants to enable their students to complete assignments.

“Every day, teachers across the nation grapple with the challenges faced by students who lack internet access at home, a significant barrier to learning in today’s digital world,” said Ben Weintraub, CEO of Kajeet. “We are resolute in our commitment and want to help these impacted districts and libraries pivot quickly.”

Kajeet’s solutions prioritize student safety and security with robust content filtering and management tools that comply with educational requirements and the Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA). Last year, Kajeet Sentinel blocked billions of student attempts to access TikTok and other non-educational sites. This regulated filtering, with parameters set by school administrators based on grade level, has proven effective.

Thousands of schools and libraries across the country applied for hotspot funding this year. It is estimated that this reversal could potentially impact more than 6 million individuals nationwide. As districts and libraries now face the pressing task of identifying alternative funding sources, Kajeet stands firm in its commitment to providing affordable and secure connectivity solutions.

“We fully recognize the significant impact this E-Rate reversal for hotspots will have on districts’ carefully laid plans to provide essential off-campus connectivity,” added Weintraub. “By honoring E-Rate pricing, we aim to provide immediate stability and empower districts to continue their indispensable programs without disruption, ensuring that no student is left behind.”

To take advantage of this limited E-Rate offer, please visit our website.

About Kajeet:

Kajeet provides optimized IoT connectivity, software and hardware solutions that deliver safe, reliable, and controlled internet connectivity to nearly 3,000 businesses, schools and districts, state, and local governments. Kajeet’s award-winning management platform, Sentinel®, includes visibility into real-time data usage, policy control management, custom content filters for added security, and multi-network flexibility. Since 2003, Kajeet has helped thousands of organizations connect over a million devices around the world. To learn more, visit kajeet.com

Media Contact:

Linda Jennings, Kajeet Corporate Communications

248-521-3606 ljennings@kajeet.com

The MIL Network –

May 9, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: Pope Leo XIV faces limits on changing the Catholic Church − but Francis made reforms that set the stage for larger changes

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dennis Doyle, Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies, University of Dayton

Newly elected Pope Leo XIV appears at the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican on Thursday, May 8, 2025. AP Photo/Andrew Medichini

Cardinal Robert Prevost of the United States has been picked to be the new leader of the Roman Catholic Church; he will be known as Pope Leo XIV.

Attention now turns to what vision the first U.S. pope will bring.

Change is hard to bring about in the Catholic Church. During his pontificate, Francis often gestured toward change without actually changing church doctrines. He permitted discussion of ordaining married men in remote regions where populations were greatly underserved due to a lack of priests, but he did not actually allow it. On his own initiative, he set up a commission to study the possibility of ordaining women as deacons, but he did not follow it through.

However, he did allow priests to offer the Eucharist, the most important Catholic sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, to Catholics who had divorced and remarried without being granted an annulment.

Likewise, Francis did not change the official teaching that a sacramental marriage is between a man and a woman, but he did allow for the blessing of gay couples, in a manner that did appear to be a sanctioning of gay marriage.

To what degree will the new pope stand or not stand in continuity with Francis? As a scholar who has studied the writings and actions of the popes since the time of the Second Vatican Council, a series of meetings held to modernize the church from 1962 to 1965, I am aware that every pope comes with his own vision and his own agenda for leading the church.

Still, the popes who immediately preceded them set practical limits on what changes could be made. There were limitations on Francis as well; however, the new pope, I argue, will have more leeway because of the signals Francis sent.

The process of synodality

Francis initiated a process called “synodality,” a term that combines the Greek words for “journey” and “together.” Synodality involves gathering Catholics of various ranks and points of view to share their faith and pray with each other as they address challenges faced by the church today.

One of Francis’ favorite themes was inclusion. He carried forward the teaching of the Second Vatican Council that the Holy Spirit – that is, the Spirit of God who inspired the prophets and is believed to be sent by Christ among Christians in a special way – is at work throughout the whole church; it includes not only the hierarchy but all of the church members. This belief constituted the core principle underlying synodality.

Pope Francis with the participants of the Synod of Bishops’ 16th General Assembly in the Paul VI Hall at the Vatican on Oct. 23, 2023.
AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia

Francis launched a two-year global consultation process in October 2022, culminating in a synod in Rome in October 2024. Catholics all over the world offered their insights and opinions during this process. The synod discussed many issues, some of which were controversial, such as clerical sexual abuse, the need for oversight of bishops, the role of women in general and the ordination of women as deacons.

The final synod document did not offer conclusions concerning these topics but rather aimed more at promoting the transformation of the entire Catholic Church into a synodal church in which Catholics tackle together the many challenges of the modern world. Francis refrained from issuing his own document in response, in order that the synod’s statement could stand on its own.

The process of synodality in one sense places limits on bishops and the pope by emphasizing their need to listen closely to all church members before making decisions. In another sense, though, in the long run the process opens up the possibility for needed developments to take place when and if lay Catholics overwhelmingly testify that they believe the church should move in a certain direction.

Change is hard in the church

A pope, however, cannot simply reverse official positions that his immediate predecessors had been emphasizing. Practically speaking, there needs to be a papacy, or two, during which a pope will either remain silent on matters that call for change or at least limit himself to hints and signals on such issues.

In 1864, Pius IX condemned the proposition that “the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.” It wasn’t until 1965 – some 100 years later – that the Second Vatican Council, in The Declaration on Religious Freedom, would affirm that “a wrong is done when government imposes upon its people, by force or fear or other means, the profession or repudiation of any religion. …”

A second major reason why popes may refrain from making top-down changes is that they may not want to operate like a dictator issuing executive orders in an authoritarian manner. Francis was accused by his critics of acting in this way with his positions on Eucharist for those remarried without a prior annulment and on blessings for gay couples. The major thrust of his papacy, however, with his emphasis on synodality, was actually in the opposite direction.

Notably, when the Amazon Synod – held in Rome in October 2019 – voted 128-41 to allow for married priests in the Brazilian Amazon region, Francis rejected it as not being the appropriate time for such a significant change.

Past doctrines

The belief that the pope should express the faith of the people and not simply his own personal opinions is not a new insight from Francis.

The doctrine of papal infallibility, declared at the First Vatican Council in 1870, held that the pope, under certain conditions, could express the faith of the church without error.

The limitations and qualifications of this power include that the pope be speaking not personally but in his official capacity as the head of the church; he must not be in heresy; he must be free of coercion and of sound mind; he must be addressing a matter of faith and morals; and he must consult relevant documents and other Catholics so that what he teaches represents not simply his own opinions but the faith of the church.

The Marian doctrines of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption offer examples of the importance of consultation. The Immaculate Conception, proclaimed by Pope Pius IX in 1854, is the teaching that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was herself preserved from original sin, a stain inherited from Adam that Catholics believe all other human beings are born with, from the moment of her conception. The Assumption, proclaimed by Pius XII in 1950, is the doctrine that Mary was taken body and soul into heaven at the end of her earthly life.

The documents in which these doctrines were proclaimed stressed that the bishops of the church had been consulted and that the faith of the lay people was being affirmed.

Unity, above all

One of the main duties of the pope is to protect the unity of the Catholic Church. On one hand, making many changes quickly can lead to schism, an actual split in the community.

In 2022, for example, the Global Methodist Church split from the United Methodist Church over same-sex marriage and the ordination of noncelibate gay bishops. There have also been various schisms within the Anglican communion in recent years. The Catholic Church faces similar challenges but so far has been able to avoid schisms by limiting the actual changes being made.

On the other hand, not making reasonable changes that acknowledge positive developments in the culture regarding issues such as the full inclusion of women or the dignity of gays and lesbians can result in the large-scale exit of members.

Pope Leo XIV, I argue, needs to be a spiritual leader, a person of vision, who can build upon the legacy of his immediate predecessors in such a way as to meet the challenges of the present moment. He already stated that he wants a synodal church that is “close to the people who suffer,” signaling a great deal about the direction he will take.

If the new pope is able to update church teachings on some hot-button issues, it will be precisely because Francis set the stage for him.

Dennis Doyle 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. Pope Leo XIV faces limits on changing the Catholic Church − but Francis made reforms that set the stage for larger changes – https://theconversation.com/pope-leo-xiv-faces-limits-on-changing-the-catholic-church-but-francis-made-reforms-that-set-the-stage-for-larger-changes-256181

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Pope Leo XIV faces limits on changing the Catholic Church − but Francis made reforms that set the stage for larger changes

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Dennis Doyle, Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies, University of Dayton

Newly elected Pope Leo XIV appears at the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica at the Vatican on Thursday, May 8, 2025. AP Photo/Andrew Medichini

Cardinal Robert Prevost of the United States has been picked to be the new leader of the Roman Catholic Church; he will be known as Pope Leo XIV.

Attention now turns to what vision the first U.S. pope will bring.

Change is hard to bring about in the Catholic Church. During his pontificate, Francis often gestured toward change without actually changing church doctrines. He permitted discussion of ordaining married men in remote regions where populations were greatly underserved due to a lack of priests, but he did not actually allow it. On his own initiative, he set up a commission to study the possibility of ordaining women as deacons, but he did not follow it through.

However, he did allow priests to offer the Eucharist, the most important Catholic sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, to Catholics who had divorced and remarried without being granted an annulment.

Likewise, Francis did not change the official teaching that a sacramental marriage is between a man and a woman, but he did allow for the blessing of gay couples, in a manner that did appear to be a sanctioning of gay marriage.

To what degree will the new pope stand or not stand in continuity with Francis? As a scholar who has studied the writings and actions of the popes since the time of the Second Vatican Council, a series of meetings held to modernize the church from 1962 to 1965, I am aware that every pope comes with his own vision and his own agenda for leading the church.

Still, the popes who immediately preceded them set practical limits on what changes could be made. There were limitations on Francis as well; however, the new pope, I argue, will have more leeway because of the signals Francis sent.

The process of synodality

Francis initiated a process called “synodality,” a term that combines the Greek words for “journey” and “together.” Synodality involves gathering Catholics of various ranks and points of view to share their faith and pray with each other as they address challenges faced by the church today.

One of Francis’ favorite themes was inclusion. He carried forward the teaching of the Second Vatican Council that the Holy Spirit – that is, the Spirit of God who inspired the prophets and is believed to be sent by Christ among Christians in a special way – is at work throughout the whole church; it includes not only the hierarchy but all of the church members. This belief constituted the core principle underlying synodality.

Pope Francis with the participants of the Synod of Bishops’ 16th General Assembly in the Paul VI Hall at the Vatican on Oct. 23, 2023.
AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia

Francis launched a two-year global consultation process in October 2022, culminating in a synod in Rome in October 2024. Catholics all over the world offered their insights and opinions during this process. The synod discussed many issues, some of which were controversial, such as clerical sexual abuse, the need for oversight of bishops, the role of women in general and the ordination of women as deacons.

The final synod document did not offer conclusions concerning these topics but rather aimed more at promoting the transformation of the entire Catholic Church into a synodal church in which Catholics tackle together the many challenges of the modern world. Francis refrained from issuing his own document in response, in order that the synod’s statement could stand on its own.

The process of synodality in one sense places limits on bishops and the pope by emphasizing their need to listen closely to all church members before making decisions. In another sense, though, in the long run the process opens up the possibility for needed developments to take place when and if lay Catholics overwhelmingly testify that they believe the church should move in a certain direction.

Change is hard in the church

A pope, however, cannot simply reverse official positions that his immediate predecessors had been emphasizing. Practically speaking, there needs to be a papacy, or two, during which a pope will either remain silent on matters that call for change or at least limit himself to hints and signals on such issues.

In 1864, Pius IX condemned the proposition that “the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church.” It wasn’t until 1965 – some 100 years later – that the Second Vatican Council, in The Declaration on Religious Freedom, would affirm that “a wrong is done when government imposes upon its people, by force or fear or other means, the profession or repudiation of any religion. …”

A second major reason why popes may refrain from making top-down changes is that they may not want to operate like a dictator issuing executive orders in an authoritarian manner. Francis was accused by his critics of acting in this way with his positions on Eucharist for those remarried without a prior annulment and on blessings for gay couples. The major thrust of his papacy, however, with his emphasis on synodality, was actually in the opposite direction.

Notably, when the Amazon Synod – held in Rome in October 2019 – voted 128-41 to allow for married priests in the Brazilian Amazon region, Francis rejected it as not being the appropriate time for such a significant change.

Past doctrines

The belief that the pope should express the faith of the people and not simply his own personal opinions is not a new insight from Francis.

The doctrine of papal infallibility, declared at the First Vatican Council in 1870, held that the pope, under certain conditions, could express the faith of the church without error.

The limitations and qualifications of this power include that the pope be speaking not personally but in his official capacity as the head of the church; he must not be in heresy; he must be free of coercion and of sound mind; he must be addressing a matter of faith and morals; and he must consult relevant documents and other Catholics so that what he teaches represents not simply his own opinions but the faith of the church.

The Marian doctrines of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption offer examples of the importance of consultation. The Immaculate Conception, proclaimed by Pope Pius IX in 1854, is the teaching that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was herself preserved from original sin, a stain inherited from Adam that Catholics believe all other human beings are born with, from the moment of her conception. The Assumption, proclaimed by Pius XII in 1950, is the doctrine that Mary was taken body and soul into heaven at the end of her earthly life.

The documents in which these doctrines were proclaimed stressed that the bishops of the church had been consulted and that the faith of the lay people was being affirmed.

Unity, above all

One of the main duties of the pope is to protect the unity of the Catholic Church. On one hand, making many changes quickly can lead to schism, an actual split in the community.

In 2022, for example, the Global Methodist Church split from the United Methodist Church over same-sex marriage and the ordination of noncelibate gay bishops. There have also been various schisms within the Anglican communion in recent years. The Catholic Church faces similar challenges but so far has been able to avoid schisms by limiting the actual changes being made.

On the other hand, not making reasonable changes that acknowledge positive developments in the culture regarding issues such as the full inclusion of women or the dignity of gays and lesbians can result in the large-scale exit of members.

Pope Leo XIV, I argue, needs to be a spiritual leader, a person of vision, who can build upon the legacy of his immediate predecessors in such a way as to meet the challenges of the present moment. He already stated that he wants a synodal church that is “close to the people who suffer,” signaling a great deal about the direction he will take.

If the new pope is able to update church teachings on some hot-button issues, it will be precisely because Francis set the stage for him.

Dennis Doyle 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. Pope Leo XIV faces limits on changing the Catholic Church − but Francis made reforms that set the stage for larger changes – https://theconversation.com/pope-leo-xiv-faces-limits-on-changing-the-catholic-church-but-francis-made-reforms-that-set-the-stage-for-larger-changes-256181

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Klobuchar Presses Justice Department on Media Subpoena Policy and Threats to the First Amendment

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn)
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) led her Judiciary Committee colleagues in pressing Attorney General Pam Bondi regarding her decision to change Justice Department policies to make it easier for the Justice Department to subpoena journalists to obtain information about their confidential sources and potentially harass journalists who write stories critical of the Administration. .
“We write to express our deep concern with the Department of Justice’s April 25, 2025 memorandum changing the guidance that set limitations on the Department’s ability to subpoena materials from journalists and news organizations,” wrote the Senators. “The free press is a bedrock of our democracy and reporters must be able to do their jobs without fear of being investigated or prosecuted.”
“When asked at your confirmation hearing to commit to ‘respect the importance of a free press,’ you said ‘absolutely,’” the Senators continued. “Yet your decision to rescind important limits on the Justice Department’s ability to compel information from the press threatens the ability of journalists to fully perform their critical jobs, as guaranteed by the First Amendment.”
Along with Klobuchar, the letter was signed by every Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee – Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Chris Coons (D-DE), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Peter Welch (D-VT), and Adam Schiff (D-CA).
The full letter is available here and below.
Dear Attorney General Bondi:
We write to express our deep concern with the Department of Justice’s April 25, 2025 memorandum changing the guidance that set limitations on the Department’s ability to subpoena materials from journalists and news organizations.
The free press is a bedrock of our democracy and reporters must be able to do their jobs without fear of being investigated or prosecuted. When asked at your confirmation hearing to commit to “respect the importance of a free press,” you said “absolutely.” Yet your decision to rescind important limits on the Justice Department’s ability to compel information from the press threatens the ability of journalists to fully perform their critical jobs, as guaranteed by the First Amendment.
Under the previous guidance, the Justice Department was authorized to subpoena journalists engaged in news gathering only “[w]hen necessary to prevent an imminent or concrete risk of death or serious bodily harm.” Under the 2025 guidance, Justice Department officials can take the extraordinary step of subpoenaing journalists merely to investigate “unauthorized disclosures that undermine President Trump’s policies,” extending far beyond disclosures of classified information. In other words, under this new guidance, there is little protection for journalists who publish any story critical of the Administration from being threatened with a subpoena and litigation to enforce the subpoena. The threat to journalists is especially concerning given Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Kash Patel’s claims prior to his confirmation that the news media is “the most powerful enemy the United States has ever seen” and that he would “come after the people in the media . . . criminally or civilly.”
Nor does it appear that the Justice Department would subpoena reporters’ records only as a last resort. Under the guidelines, the Justice Department may subpoena journalists after the Attorney General has made only a few subjective determinations, such as whether the information sought is “essential to a successful prosecution,” whether “reasonable attempts” to obtain the information from alternative sources were made, and whether engaging in negotiations would threaten “the integrity of the investigation.” These factors make it far too easy for the Attorney General to compel journalists to reveal sources.
This change will also deter whistleblowers from coming forward with information to the news media, depriving the public of valuable information about its government. Whistleblowers that violate the law—for example by disclosing classified information—should be subject to the legal consequences of that action, but the government should not be allowed to intimidate or harass journalists who lawfully report the news.
As the Office of Legal Policy prepares regulations to implement your memorandum, we respectfully request that you provide responses to the following questions:
What protections are in place to ensure that journalists are not targeted because they published a news article critical of the Administration?
Will you commit to ensuring that issuing a subpoena to a journalist or news organization will be used only as a last resort when there is a compelling and overriding interest in the information, such as protecting national security?
Will the regulations require the Department to comply with state shield laws?
Is the Department consulting with outside organizations, including organizations representing journalists, as part of the preparation of regulations? If so, what organizations?
What measures will the regulations put in place to ensure that the White House is not allowed to order or influence the issuance of a subpoena to a journalist or news organization?
What process for review, if any, will be put in place to ensure the new regulations are being followed and are not being abused for political or any other inappropriate purpose?
Has the Justice Department issued any subpoenas to journalists or news organizations under this new guidance? If so, to whom and seeking what information?

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Klobuchar Presses for Bipartisan Path Forward on Safe AI Development, Highlights Need for Legislation to Give Americans Control Over Their Voice and Likeness

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn)
WATCH KLOBUCHAR’S FULL QUESTIONS HERE
WASHINGTON – At a Senate Commerce Committee hearing titled “Winning the AI Race: Strengthening U.S. Capabilities in Computing and Innovation,” U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) pressed tech leaders on the future of AI development.
Testifying at the hearing were Sam Altman, Co-Founder and CEO of OpenAI; Lisa Su, CEO and Chair of Advanced Micro Devices; Michael Intrator, CEO and Co-Founder of CoreWeave; and Brad Smith, Vice Chair and President of Microsoft.
“I think David Brooks put it the best when he said, ‘I’ve found it incredibly hard to write about AI because it is literally unknowable whether this technology is leading us to heaven or hell.’ We want it to lead us to heaven, and I think we do that by making sure we have some rules of the road in place so it doesn’t get stymied or set backwards because of scams or because of use by people who want to do us harm,” said Klobuchar.
Klobuchar is a leader on efforts to put in place guardrails around the use and development of AI. Last Congress, Klobuchar and Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) partnered on the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Research, Innovation, and Accountability Act, which would create baseline accountability for AI deployment in high-risk areas, like managing critical infrastructure. The bill would also boost transparency for AI systems that are used to decide a person’s access to health care or housing, or to decide who to hire and fire.
Last month, Klobuchar reintroduced the bipartisan Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe (NO FAKES) Act with Senators Chris Coons (D-DE), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), and Thom Tillis (R-NC). This legislation aims to protect Americans’ voice and likeness and combat the proliferation of AI deepfakes.
Klobuchar’s and Senator Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) bipartisan TAKE IT DOWN Act passed Congress last week – the bill is now headed to the President’s desk to be signed into law. The TAKE IT DOWN Act would criminalize the publication of non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII), including AI-generated NCII, and require social media and similar websites to have in place procedures to remove such content within 48 hours of notice from a victim.
A rough transcript of Klobuchar’s questions is available below. Video is available HERE for download.
Senator Klobuchar: Thank you very much, Senator Cruz. A lot of exciting things with AI, especially from a state like mine that’s home to the Mayo Clinic, with the potential to unleash scientific research. While we’ve mapped the human genome, we have rare diseases that can be solved, so there’s a lot of positive, but we all know, as you’ve all expressed, there’s challenges that we need to get at with permitting reform. I’m a big believer in that. Energy development, thank you, Mr. Smith, for mentioning this with wind and solar and the potential for more fusion and nuclear, but wind and solar, the price going down dramatically in the last few years, and to get there, we’re going to have to do a lot better.
I think David Brooks put it the best when he said, “I found it incredibly hard to write about AI because it is literally unknowable whether this technology is leading us to heaven or hell.” We want it to lead us to heaven, and I think we do that by making sure we have some rules of the road in place so it doesn’t get stymied or set backwards because of scams or because of use by people who want to do us harm.
As mentioned by Senator Cantwell, Senator Thune, and I have teamed up on legislation to set up basic guardrails for the riskiest non-defense applications of AI. Mr. Altman, do you agree that a risk-based approach to regulation is the best way to place necessary guardrails for AI without stifling innovation?
Sam Altman: I do, that makes a lot of sense to me.
Klobuchar: Okay, thanks. And did you figure that out in your attic?
Altman: No, that was a more recent discovery.
Klobuchar: Thank you very good. Just want to make sure. Our bill directs, Mr. Smith, the Commerce Department, to develop ways of educating consumers on how to safely use AI systems. Do you agree that consumers need to be more educated? This was one of your answers to your five words, so I assume you do.
Brad Smith: Yes, and I think it’s incumbent upon us as companies and across the business community to contribute to that education as well.
Klobuchar: Okay, very good. Back to you, Mr. Altman. The Americans rely on AI, as we know, increasingly, on some high-impact problems, to make them be able to trust that we need to make sure that we can trust the model outputs. The New York Times recently reported, earlier this week, that AI hallucinations, a new word to me, where models generate incorrect or misleading results, are getting worse. That’s their words. What standards or metrics does OpenAI use to evaluate the quality of its training data and model outputs for correctness?
Altman: On the whole, AI hallucinations are getting much better. We have not solved the problem entirely yet, but we’ve made pretty remarkable progress over the last few years. When we first launched ChatGPT, it would hallucinate things all the time. This idea of robustness, being sure you can trust the information, we’ve made huge progress there. We cite sources. The models have gotten much smarter. A lot of people use these systems all the time. And we were worried that if it was not 100, you know, .0% accurate, which is still a challenge with these systems, it would cause a bunch of problems. But users are smart. People understand, you know, what these systems are good at, when to use them, when not. And as that robustness increases, which it will continue to do. People will use it for more and more things, but as an industry, we’ve made pretty remarkable progress in that direction over the last couple of years.
Klobuchar: I know we’ll be watching that. Another challenge that has been, we’ve seen, and Senator Cruz worked and I worked on a bill together for quite a while, and that’s the TAKE IT DOWN Act, and that is that we are increasingly seeing internet activity where kids looking for a boyfriend or girlfriend, maybe they put out a real picture of themselves, it ends up being distributed at their school, or they somehow they someone tries to scam them from financial gain, or its AI, as we’ve increasingly seen, where It’s not even someone photos, but someone puts a fake body on there. And we’ve had about over 20 suicides in one year, of young people, because they felt like their life was ruined, because they were going to be exposed in this way. So this bill we passed, and through the Senate and the House, the First Lady supported it, and it’s headed to the President’s desk. Could you talk about how we can build models that can better detect harmful deep fakes? Mr. Smith
Smith: Yeah. I mean, we’re doing that. OpenAI is doing that, and a number of us are. And I think the goal is to first identify content that is generated by AI, and then, often, it is to identify what kind of content is harmful. And I think we’ve made a lot of strides in our ability to do both of those things. There’s a lot of work that’s going on across the private sector and in partnership with groups like NIC MEC to then collaboratively identify that kind of content. So it can be taken down. We’ve been doing this in some ways for 25 years, since the internet, and we’re going to need to do more of it.
Klobuchar: And on the issue, last question, Mr. Chair, since the last one was about your bill, I figure it’s okay. The newspapers and you testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Mr. Smith, about the bill Senator Kennedy and I still think that there’s an issue here about negotiating content rates. We’ve seen some action recently in Canada and other places. Can you talk about those evolving dynamics with AI developers and what’s happening here to make sure that content providers and journalists get paid for their work?
Smith: Yeah, it’s a complicated topic, but I’ll just say a couple of things. First, I think we should all want to see newspapers in some form flourish across the country, including, say, rural counties that increasingly have become news deserts, newspapers have disappeared. Second, and it’s been the issue that we discussed in the Judiciary Committee, there should be an opportunity for newspapers to get together and negotiate collectively. We’ve supported that. That will enable them to basically do better. Third, every time there’s new technology, there is a new generation of a copyright debate. That is taking place now. Some of it will probably be decided by Congress, some by the courts. A lot of it is also being addressed through collaborative action, and we should hope for all of these things. To I’ll just say, strike a balance. We want people to make a living creating content, and we want AI to advance by having access to data.
[Sen. Klobuchar followed up with an additional round of questions.]
Klobuchar: I had one more question that I wanted to ask, and it’s related to just the whole deep fake issue, just because Senator Blackburn and Senator Coons and Senator Tillis and I have worked on this really hard, and Blackburn and Coons are in the lead of the bill. But we have recently seen deep fake videos of Al Roker promoting a cure for high blood pressure, a deep fake of Brad Pitt asking for money from a hospital bed. Sony Music has worked with platforms to remove more than 75,000 songs with unauthorized deep fakes, including voices of Harry Styles Beyonce. I recently met – it’s not just famous people – there is a Grammy-nominated artist from Minnesota, talked to him about what’s going on with digital replicas. So there’s a real concern, and it kind of gets at what Senator Schatz and I were talking about earlier with the news bill. But they just wanted to make you all aware of this legislation, because there were some differences on this, and now we have gotten a coalition, including YouTube, supporting it, as well as the Recording Industry Association, Motion Picture Association, SAG AFTRA. So it’s a big deal, and I’m hoping it’s something that you will all look at, but could you just comment – I would go to you, Mr. Smith first, about protecting people from having their likenesses replicated through AI without permission, and even if you all pledge to do it, our obvious concern is that there will, maybe other companies that wouldn’t, and that’s why I think, as we look at what these guard rails are. The protection of digital people’s digital rights should be part of this.
Smith: No, I think you’re right to point to it. It has become a growing area of concern. During the presidential election last year, both campaigns, both political parties, were concerned about the potential for deep fakes to be created. We worked with both campaigns and both parties to address that. We see it being used in really ways that I would call abusive, including of celebrities and the like. I think it starts with an ability to identify when something has been created by AI and is not a genuine, say, photographic or video image. And we do find that AI is much more capable at doing that than, say, the human eye and human judgment. I think it’s right that there be certain guardrails, and some of these we can apply voluntarily. We’ve been doing that across the industry. OpenAI and Microsoft were both part of that last year. And there are certain uses that probably should be considered across the line and therefore should be unlawful. And I think that’s where the kinds of initiatives that you’re describing have a particularly important role to play.
Klobuchar: And could you look at that legislation?
Smith: Absolutely.
Klobuchar: I appreciate it. Mr. Altman, just same question, same thing.
Altman: Of course, we’d be happy to look at the legislation. I think this is a big issue, and it’s one coming quickly… I think there’s a few areas to attack it. You can talk about AI that generates content, platforms that distribute it, how takedowns work, how we educate society, and how we build in robustness to expect this is going to happen. I do not believe it will be possible to stop the generation of the content. I think open source, open weight models are a great thing on the whole, and something we need to pursue, but it does mean that there’s going to be just a lot of these models floating around that can do this, the mass distribution, I think it’s possible to put some more guardrails in place, and that seems important, I but I don’t want to neglect the sort of societal education piece. I think with every new technology, there’s some sort of, almost always some sort of new scams that come, the sooner we can get people to understand these Be on the lookout for them. Talk about this as a thing that’s coming, and then I think that’s happening. I think the better people are very quickly understanding that content can be AI-generated, and building new kinds of defenses in their own minds about it. But still, you know, if you get a call and it sounds exactly like someone you know and they’re panicked and they need help, or if you see a video like the videos you talked about this gets at us in a very deep psychological way. And I think we need to build societal resilience, because this is coming.
Klobuchar: It’s coming, but there’s got to be some ways to – you’ve got to have some to either enforce it, damages whatever. There’s just not going to be any consequences.
Altman: Absolutely, we should have all of that. Bad actors don’t always follow the laws, and so I think we need an additional shield, or whenever we can have them. But yes, we should absolutely have that.
Klobuchar: All right. Look forward to working with you on it.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Lee Bill Establishes Obscenity Definition Across States

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Utah Mike Lee
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced the Interstate Obscenity Definition Act today to clarify the legal definition of “obscenity” for all states, making the transmission of obscene content across state lines more easily prosecuted. U.S. Representative Mary Miller (R-IL) is the bill’s co-lead in the House of Representatives.
“Obscenity isn’t protected by the First Amendment, but hazy and unenforceable legal definitions have allowed extreme pornography to saturate American society and reach countless children,” said Senator Mike Lee. “Our bill updates the legal definition of obscenity for the internet age so this content can be taken down and its peddlers prosecuted.”
“The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act equips law enforcement with the tools they need to target and remove obscene material from the internet, which is alarmingly destructive and far outside the bounds of protected free speech under the Constitution. I’m proud to lead this effort in the House with Senator Lee to safeguard American families and ensure this dangerous material is kept out of our homes and off our screens.” – Representative Mary Miller
The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA) clarifies the definition of obscenity across all states and provides updated descriptions suited to modern content. The new definition removes dependence on ever-changing and elusive public opinion, replacing ambiguity with practical standards to make obscenity identifiable. This change will prevent obscene material such as pornography from evading prosecution by relying on the legal confusion of differing standards between states. Under IODA, law enforcement will be empowered to identify and prevent obscenity from being transmitted across state lines.
Obscenity is already unprotected speech under the First Amendment, but its current definition makes it difficult to assess and prosecute. The current legal definition of obscenity was taken from a Supreme Court case argued in 1973. Its standards are subjective and vague, making it difficult to apply with certainty to any given material. Using a pre-internet standard for modern times presents serious challenges – particularly when states use differing definitions for “obscenity” – and allows criminals to evade prosecution.
The Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA):
Defines “obscenity” within the Communications Act of 1934 as content that:
taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion,
depicts, describes or represents actual or simulated sexual acts with the objective intent to arouse, titillate, or gratify the sexual desires of a person, and,
taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Strengthens the existing general prohibition on obscenity in the Communications Act (47 U.S.C 223(a)) by removing the “intent” requirement that only prohibits the transmission of obscenity for the purposes abusing, threatening, or harassing a person.
Click here to read exclusive coverage from The Daily Caller.

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: GVP Sullivan Visits Pratt & Whitney Picket Line as Support Pours in for Striking IAM District 26 Members

Source: US GOIAM Union

IAM Local 700 and 1746 (District 26) members at Pratt & Whitney in Middletown and East Hartford, Conn., are on strike to secure a better contract.

Workers are seeking improved wage security, job security, and retirement security. But, the current company proposal do not address their core issues, despite the company’s high profits.

“I stand behind you and we’re going to fight like hell every day to get what you want,” said IAM Eastern Territory General Vice President David Sullivan.

Watch the video report here.
View photo gallery here.

Union representatives and striking members emphasized the support of IAM and highlighted that the strike is driven by a significant rejection of the company’s offer and a strong desire to protect the future for all generations of workers. The difficulties faced by striking workers, such as the cost of childcare, are also mentioned by several members who are walking the picket lines.

IAM members at Pratt and Whitney have also received an outpouring of support from the highest levels of state government and leadership in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. Additionally, the striking members at Pratt and Whitney have drawn community support from other labor organizations.

Pratt and Whitney is a leader in manufacturing engines because of their workers, who are critical to the success of our nation’s manufacturing future. I strongly encourage their leadership and the machinists union to come together to reach a fair deal negotiated in good faith.

— Governor Ned Lamont (@GovNedLamont) May 5, 2025

Proud to stand with members of the machinist union to support their work to achieve a fair & reasonable contract. CT is home to the best trained & most highly qualified in the aerospace workforce. pic.twitter.com/s4Ck17A3d5

— Lt. Gov. Susan Bysiewicz (@LGSusanB) May 6, 2025

[embedded content]

To the hardworking members of IAM Local 700 and Local 1746 fighting for better wages, job security, and pensions: we stand with you.

These workers deserve a fair contract and nothing less. https://t.co/YYXdpziZBu

— Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) May 5, 2025

Proud to join striking Pratt machinists in East Hartford—standing up for fair pay, pensions, job security & more.

— Richard Blumenthal (@SenBlumenthal) May 6, 2025

[embedded content]

[embedded content]

[embedded content]

[embedded content]

Share and Follow:

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Governor Polis Congratulates New Pope & Catholic Church

Source: US State of Colorado

DENVER – Colorado Governor Jared Polis congratulated the new Pope and Colorado’s Catholic community on this historic occasion.

“This is a joyous occasion for Catholics across the world. I congratulate the Catholic community on the historic selection of the first American Pope, Cardinal Robert Francis Prevost, who will lead the church as Pope Leo XIV. I look forward to continued strong collaboration between Colorado and the Catholic Church on helping vulnerable people in times of need. It is my hope that the new Pope follows the path of the late Pope Francis of love and kindness for all who walk the earth,” said Governor Jared Polis.

###

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Alamance Battleground to Host ‘Fight for the Backcountry,’ the Battle of Alamance Reenactment May 17

Source: US State of North Carolina

Headline: Alamance Battleground to Host ‘Fight for the Backcountry,’ the Battle of Alamance Reenactment May 17

Alamance Battleground to Host ‘Fight for the Backcountry,’ the Battle of Alamance Reenactment May 17
jejohnson6
Thu, 05/08/2025 – 14:53

BURLINGTON

Alamance Battleground State Historic Site will host a reenactment of the 1771 Battle of Alamance on Saturday, May 17, 10 a.m.- 4 p.m.

The event marks the 254th anniversary of the battle, the violent conclusion of the Regulator Movement in North Carolina. In addition to the battle reenactment, the program will feature artillery demonstrations, an 18th-century hospital, and living history interpreters portraying colonial life. The battle reenactment begins at 11 a.m. and a special guided tour of the battlefield will be offered at 3 p.m. Admission is $5 for adults and $2 for children, seniors, and military.

In the 1760s, North Carolina farmers calling themselves the Regulators — named for their desire to “regulate” public officials — acted against a corrupt colonial government. After years of working to address their concerns peacefully by holding meetings, filing lawsuits, and writing petitions, which were largely ignored, the movement took a violent turn in 1770. The Regulators attacked corrupt local officials in Hillsborough, N.C., forcing a response by colonial Gov. William Tryon.

Gov. Tryon led a militia of 1,000 men to face off against 2,000 Regulators in the Battle of Alamance on May 16, 1771. Although the Regulators outnumbered Tryon’s forces, the Regulator uprising was crushed. After his victory, Tryon moved through the North Carolina backcountry, forcing the Regulators and their sympathizers to sign loyalty oaths.

After the American Revolution, the memory of this battle shifted from fighting between factions in North Carolina into a fight between Patriots and British troops. Because of this revision, the battle became erroneously known as the “first battle of the American Revolution.” In fact, during the Revolution, many Regulators remained loyal to the crown while some men who fought with Tryon sided with the Patriots in the war for American independence.

About Alamance Battleground
Alamance Battleground State Historic Site preserves and interprets the legacy of the Battle of Alamance. On May 16, 1771, an armed group of 2,000 farmers, known as the Regulators, confronted the royal militia of colonial Governor William Tryon. The Regulators stood for moderate reforms and accountable government, and they were massacred. The site is located at 5803 NC 62 S, Burlington, N.C. For more information, visit https://historicsites.nc.gov/all-sites/alamance-battleground or call 336-227-4785.

About the North Carolina Department of Natural and Cultural Resources
The N.C. Department of Natural and Cultural Resources (DNCR) manages, promotes, and enhances the things that people love about North Carolina – its diverse arts and culture, rich history, and spectacular natural areas. Through its programs, the department enhances education, stimulates economic development, improves public health, expands accessibility, and strengthens community resiliency.

The department manages over 100 locations across the state, including 27 historic sites, seven history museums, two art museums, five science museums, four aquariums, 35 state parks, four recreation areas, dozens of state trails and natural areas, the North Carolina Zoo, the State Library, the State Archives, the N.C. Arts Council, the African American Heritage Commission, the American Indian Heritage Commission, the State Historic Preservation Office, the Office of State Archaeology, the Highway Historical Markers program, the N.C. Land and Water Fund, and the Natural Heritage Program. For more information, please visit www.dncr.nc.gov.

May 8, 2025

MIL OSI USA News –

May 9, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: India-Pakistan: escalating conflict between two nuclear powers

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jonathan Este, Senior International Affairs Editor, Associate Editor

This article was first published in The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email newsletter. Sign up to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.

Once again, India and Pakistan are locked in conflict over Kashmir. A diplomatic crisis that started with a terrorist attack that killed 26 tourists, all but one of them Indian, became a fortnight of cross-border skirmishes and pugilistic posturing from New Delhi and Islamabad. India responded on May 7 with Operation Sindoor, a series of airstrikes apparently aimed at what India said were terrorist training camps, in which at least 31 people were reportedly killed. Pakistan has vowed revenge and launched its own deadly attacks. And so an old emnity is rekindled.

India and Pakistan have been at loggerheads over Kashmir virtually since partition in 1947. Its mixed population, its geography and, importantly, its history as what was known as a “princely state”, virtually guaranteed it. Princely states, which were not administered by the British Raj were given the choice of joining either independent India or the newly created Pakistan. Kashmir, ruled over by the Hindu maharaja Hari Singh, eventually joined India.

Hari Singh reportedly did so with some misgivings. The state he ruled over had a majority population of Muslims. But when the first conflict broke out at the end of 1947, with an invasion by Pakistani tribesmen looking to take control of Kashmir, he called on India for assistance and signed a deal temporarily incorporating the state into India pending a plebiscite – which never took place.

The first India-Pakistan war ended in 1949 with a UN-mandated ceasefire. A border was drawn through the state giving India roughly two-thirds control over Jammu and Kashmir, with Pakistan controlling the other third. Both sides have claimed the whole territory ever since.

Violence has broken out periodically in the intervening decades, characterised since the 1980s by insurgencies, which India routinely accuses Pakistan of backing – an accusation which Pakistan routinely denies. Groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) have carried out terror attacks in both Kashmir and India, including LeT’s 2008 Mumbai massacre in which 166 people were killed.

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

Now the situation which the rest of the world has worried about for years, a conflict between two neighbouring nuclear armed powers, has begun to escalate with fears it might spiral out of control. Natasha Lindsteadt, an expert in international security, takes a look at the military – and nuclear– capabilities and policies of the two countries.

She writes that India has a far larger military (it’s ranked as one of the world’s top five military nations by Military Watch magazine, with Pakistan ranked ninth). The two countries have a roughly comparable nuclear arsenal. But while India has a “no first use” policy, Pakistan has never committed itself in this way, arguing it needs its nuclear arsenal to counter India’s larger conventional forces.

But even a small nuclear exchange between the two could kill more than 20 million people, writes Lindsteadt.

Read more:
Why are India and Pakistan on the brink of war and how dangerous is the situation? An expert explains

Part of the problem seems to be a complete lack of communications at the highest level. US president, Donald Trump, initially appeared reluctant to get involved, saying that he is “sure they’ll figure it out one way or the other … There’s great tension between Pakistan and India, but there always has been.” He is since reported to have offered to step in, an offer apparently politely rejected by New Delhi.

“What is needed now is robust, real-time crisis communication between the two nations,” write security experts Syed Ali Zia Jaffery of the University of Lahore and Nicholas Wheeler of the University of Birmingham. The problem is that there is no mechanism for that.

And as we know from the Cuban missile crisis, when the US and Soviet Union came very close to a nuclear exchange, it’s all too easy for mistakes to be made which could escalate a conflict between two nuclear powers into a conflagration.

After that crisis, the two leaders involved, John F. Kennedy and Nikita Krushchev, set up a communications link (which became known as the “hotline”) to enable direct communications. As Jaffery and Wheeler point out, this served to keep the rival powers from further dangerous confrontation (it even helped in bringing about arms treaties when Ronald Reagan was in the White House and Mikhail Gorbachev was in the Kremlin.

Read more:
Why a hotline is needed to help bring India and Pakistan back from the brink of a disastrous war

For a deeper dive into the crisis and the long history of conflict between India and Pakistan, here are five essential reads, carefully curated for you by my colleague Matt Williams, senior international editor at The Conversation in the US.

Read more:
India-Pakistan strikes: 5 essential reads on decades of rivalry and tensions over Kashmir

Netanyahu’s Gaza plan

In the Middle East, meanwhile, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are planning to move in large numbers into Gaza with a plan to occupy the whole of the territory. The prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has described the move as a “forceful operation” which will destroy Hamas and rescue its remaining hostages. The remaining population of 2.1 million Palestinian civilians will be moved “to proect it”.

With more than 50,000 people dead in Gaza since the conflict began in October 2023, you have to say Israel’s attempts to protect civilians have been decidedly unsuccessful.

Leonie Fleischmann, senior lecturer in international politics at City St George’s, University of London, sees this as Israel’s next step towards clearing Gaza of Palestinians, something she says Netanyahu’s far-right enablers have been pushing for all along. But she also sees parallels with what is happening in the West Bank, where Israel is gradually annexing land occupied by Palestinians and mandated by the Oslo accords of the 1990s as part of a future Palestinian state.

The recent Louis Theroux documentary film showed the terrible circumstances under which Palestinians live on the West Bank, juxtaposing that with the determination of extreme Zionists to take over what they see as the land of their forefathers.

Fleischmann notes that this week, Israeli cabinet minister Bezalel Smotrich approved plans for construction on land in an area which, if given to settlers, would effectively cut the West Bank in two. This would, she says, “bury any remaining hope for a two-state solution”. Rather chillingly, Smotrich is quoted as saying: “This is how you kill the Palestinian state.”

Read more:
Israeli plan to occupy all of Gaza could open the door for annexation of the West Bank

Where would Palestinians go under Netanyahu’s plan? Well, if the Israeli prime minister shares Donald Trump’s vision of redeveloping Gaza as some sort of Middle Eastern “riviera”, they’d be dispersed into countries such as Egypt and Jordan.

This idea is a non-starter, writes Scott Lucas of University College Dublin. Lucas, a Middle East expert who has written regularly for us about Israel and Gaza and answered our questions about the situation. He says Egyptian president, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has definitively ruled out accepting a mass exodus of Palestinians via the Rafah crossing at Gaza’s southern end. And Jordan is equally unwilling to accept any more Palestinian refugees. Apart from anything else, it already has about 3 million.

As Lucas writes: “Any Arab government that takes in Gazans, even amid a humanitarian crisis, would be tacitly burying the idea of a Palestinian state. That would break a 77-year-old principle and resurrect the Nakba – the forced displacement and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in 1948.”

Israel is unlikely to get much international support for such a move either, Lucas adds. Donald Trump is preoccupied with other things and, even if he weren’t, the rest of the international community would hardly stand for what would probably be seen as an act of ethnic cleansing on a massive scale.

Read more:
What does Netanyahu’s plan for ‘conquering’ Gaza mean for Israel, Palestine and their neighbours? Expert Q&A

But what do ordinary Israelis think of their government’s plans for Gaza? For most Israelis the paramount factor is their security. So far the Netanyahu government’s actions in Gaza had enjoyed majority suppport for that reason and in the hope that somehow the conflict might lead to getting the remaining hostages home.

But the latest plan to take Gaza completely could scupper any hope of repatriating the hostages. And there are signs that many Israelis are getting tired of the constant crisis and conflict. There appears to be a growing appetite for peace.

Or so writes Yuval Katz of Loughborough University, who grew up in Israel but left eight years ago to pursue an academic career. He was recently home for the first time in two years and spent time contacting peace groups. Here is what he found.

Read more:
Israel’s peace movement offers a ray of hope amid the pain of Gaza conflict

World Affairs Briefing from The Conversation UK is available as a weekly email newsletter. Click here to get updates directly in your inbox.

– ref. India-Pakistan: escalating conflict between two nuclear powers – https://theconversation.com/india-pakistan-escalating-conflict-between-two-nuclear-powers-256277

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

May 9, 2025

Category: Politics

1: Hands off: the case for doing less

2. Helping out: supporting informal or temporary uses

3. Stepping in: when formalising makes sense

A call to action

A holistic approach

What we found

Why did it work?

An image of irrational resolve

Trump’s ‘reverse Nixon’ efforts

Success would require discipline

For Australia, the stakes are immense

Beyond looking at what people say

Teaching AI to understand human behaviour online

Meet the ‘disagreers’

Soccer fans and gamers

Beyond troll detection

Influence on the American right

Rediscovered by radical conservatives

Risk bringing about America’s decline

Tech leadership, geopolitical dominance

Diminished intellectual capital

Geopolitical decline

Essential to democracy

Tracking media coverage

No draining on public coffers

Background:

The process of synodality

Change is hard in the church

Past doctrines

Unity, above all

The process of synodality

Change is hard in the church

Past doctrines

Unity, above all

Netanyahu’s Gaza plan