PERSPECTA

News from every angle

Results for “The Information”

35 stories found

Corinthians close to signing Jesse Lingard
SportYahoo16h ago

Corinthians close to signing Jesse Lingard

Corinthians is close to signing the English attacking midfielder Jesse Lingard.The information was released by journalists André Hernan and Bruno Andrade from ESPN.According to them, financial…

Commons speaker Lindsay Hoyle says he tipped off police about Mandelson – video
PoliticsThe Guardian1d ago

Commons speaker Lindsay Hoyle says he tipped off police about Mandelson – video

Hoyle says he told the Metropolitan police, after receiving the information, that former cabinet minister Peter Mandelson was planning to leave the country. He said he acted in 'good faith' as was 'his duty and responsibility'. Mandelson, who has denied attempting to flee the country, was arrested on Monday on suspicion of misconduct in a public office, relating to his friendship with the convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein Commons speaker says he passed information to Met that Mand...

Two teenagers behind breach of 4.62m Seoul bike users’ data
TechnologyKorea Herald3d ago

Two teenagers behind breach of 4.62m Seoul bike users’ data

Two teenagers were found to be behind the leak of personal information belonging to 4.62 million users of Seoul’s public bike-sharing service “Ttareungi”, police said Monday. The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency’s cybercrime investigation unit said it had apprehended two high school students on charges of violating the Information and Communications Network Act. The suspects were forwarded to prosecutors without detention. The data breach occurred between June 28 and 29, 2024, involving 4.62 mil

When Both Sides Go Quiet
PoliticsFox NewsYahoozerohedge+1Tehran Times9d ago4 sources

When Both Sides Go Quiet

When Both Sides Go Quiet Submitted by QTR's Fringe Finance There is a political instinct that I’ve developed over the last few decade or so: when both parties are shouting, it’s business as usual. When both parties go quiet, pay attention, because something ugly is probably getting passed or covered up, and the American taxpayer is likely footing the bill of consequences. Few public controversies in recent memory have generated as much bipartisan distrust as the handling of the Epstein files. Republicans accused Democrats of failing to pursue full transparency while President Biden was in office. Now Democrats accuse Republicans of withholding or slow-walking the release of the complete records. The blame shifts with political control, but the underlying fact pattern remains the same: both parties have figures of influence whose names have surfaced in connection with Epstein’s orbit. That reality complicates the politics of accountability and fuels public suspicion that neither side is entirely comfortable with full disclosure. What should have been a straightforward matter of transparency, identifying networks of power, influence, and possible criminal complicity, has instead unfolded as a slow humiliating drip of redactions, procedural delays, partial disclosures and cagey congressional testimony. Each release seems to raise more questions than it resolves. These questions revolve around sex trafficking, exploitation, abuse of minors, coercion and manipulation, elite complicity, obstruction of justice, etc. But the deeper damage taking place now is not only about the crimes associated with Jeffrey Epstein. It is about institutional response. If only one political party had meaningful exposure to the scandal, the other would likely have been far more relentless in demanding transparency. But this is different. Despite Democrats harping on the files now, they were quiet in the years prior to Trump’s second term and, because Epstein’s connections span media, finance, academia, and politics, the discomfort still appears bipartisan. And that is precisely what unsettles me. When both political parties fail to press aggressively on something meaningful, especially something morally explosive, it often suggests that the issue cuts deeper than surface narratives allow. Bipartisan hesitation can signal overlapping vulnerability. Silence across the aisle is rarely accidental. The horror here is not just what may have occurred in private circles of power, but the perception that the institutions tasked with accountability are reluctant to fully illuminate it. Justice delayed in cases involving elites feels less like procedural caution and more like reputational risk management. Whether or not that perception is entirely fair, it is corrosive. Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs’ chief legal officer Kathryn Ruemmler announced her resignation after new emails with Epstein came to light, prompting internal pressure at the firm. British political figure Peter Mandelson resigned from the House of Lords and the Labour Party, and Scotland Yard has opened a criminal investigation into his ties with Epstein. In Norway, parliament has launched an external inquiry into prominent diplomats for their connections to Epstein, and police are investigating corruption allegations against former prime minister Thorbjørn Jagland and others. 🔥 50% OFF FOR LIFE: Using this coupon entitles you to 50% off an annual subscription to Fringe Finance for life: Get 50% off forever Across Europe, these disclosures have triggered formal probes, resignations, and institutional reviews that contrast sharply with the relative lack of accountability for high-profile figures in the United States, where calls for investigations and resignations have largely stalled. I mean, is Les Wexner really allowed to just walk around free at this point? How can that be possible? How are Kimbal Musk and Elon Musk allowed to remain on Tesla’s board? Why isn’t Bill Gates being hauled in front of congress? I have long argued that Americans should apply the same “when both parties agree, the American public is getting screwed” scrutiny to monetary policy for a similar reason. It is one of the few areas where both major political parties display remarkable convergence. While they wage visible battles over cultural issues and tax rates, they tend to align on central banking frameworks, large scale liquidity interventions, and deficit tolerance. Like other cover-ups, that alignment deserves examination. Monetary policy operates largely outside daily partisan warfare, yet it shapes purchasing power, asset prices, debt burdens, and wealth distribution. When balance sheets expand aggressively and markets are repeatedly stabilized during downturns, the effects are uneven. Asset holders often benefit first and most. Meanwhile, wage earners experience the lagging side effects such as inflationary pressure, higher living costs, and diminished purchasing power. Supporters of Modern Monetary Theory argue that sovereign currency systems provide more fiscal flexibility than traditionally assumed. Critics counter that, in practice, repeated interventions risk entrenching a cycle in which gains are privatized and losses are socialized. When markets rise, the wealth effect accrues to those with substantial exposure. When markets falter, public backstops prevent collapse. The middle class absorbs the inflationary residue. And the wealth gap widens: The structural similarity matters. When both parties avoid aggressive debate on a policy that materially burdens the average American, it raises the same instinctive question of what incentives are being protected. Monetary policy may not carry the visceral grotesqueness of the Epstein scandal, but it carries long term economic consequences that most Americans don’t know they are bearing, and don’t understand that they are being lied to about. The comparison is not moral equivalence. It is structural parallel. In one case, alleged networks of power may be shielded by mutual hesitation. In the other, a financial architecture persists with limited democratic scrutiny because challenging it would destabilize shared political comfort. In both cases, bipartisan alignment dampens confrontation. Two forms of silence. Two different domains. Both revealing. Foreign policy, particularly the authorization and funding of wars, has often followed a similar pattern. While domestic issues produce loud partisan divides, military interventions abroad frequently pass with overwhelming support from leadership in both parties. Public debate may flare at the margins, but institutional consensus tends to solidify quickly once action begins. History shows that major military engagements, from post 9/11 authorizations to prolonged overseas conflicts, have often been backed by broad congressional majorities. The initial votes are decisive. The funding continues year after year. Only later, when costs mount and public opinion shifts, does meaningful dissent emerge. By then, strategic commitments and financial obligations are deeply entrenched. Again, the pattern is not about moral equivalence between policy domains. It is about incentives. When both political parties converge quickly on matters involving immense money, immense power, or immense liability, scrutiny tends to narrow rather than widen. And when scrutiny narrows at the highest levels, the public’s role shifts from participant to spectator. When both political parties fail to address something meaningful, when they close ranks instead of competing for exposure, the public should not assume the issue is trivial. More often, it suggests the truth behind the surface may be larger and more consequential than advertised. Democracies depend not just on disagreement, but on adversarial pressure. When that pressure disappears, citizens are right to lean in, not tune out. When both sides go quiet, the story is rarely over. As the Epstein files are showing, it may simply run far deeper than we are being shown. Now read: Today's Epstein’s Records Destroy Official Narratives Our Liquidity Addiction Continues Do DOJ Docs Show Epstein Death Notice A Day Early? The Hijacking Of Bitcoin: Epstein’s Hidden Network Why America’s Two-Party System Will Never Threaten the True Political Elites QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions. All positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier. I am an investor in Mark’s fund. The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important. Tyler Durden Tue, 02/17/2026 - 14:00

Corrigendum
WorldDawn11d ago

Corrigendum

A story titled “Imran Khan’s right eye vision ‘improving’, says sister citing report” was published by Dawn.com on February 16. The report quoted a social media account purporting to belong to Noreen Niazi, a sister of former prime minister Imran Khan. Subsequent checks have confirmed that the account was not authentic and that the information shared was inaccurate and mala fide. The story has since been removed from our platforms. We are conducting an internal review of the circumstances that led to its publication and strengthening our verification protocols, particularly with regard to social media sourcing. Dawn remains committed to upholding the highest standards of accuracy, verification and editorial integrity, and will continue to take corrective steps whenever necessary to ensure responsible reporting.

MoU signed for digitalised Haj management system
PoliticsDawn2d ago

MoU signed for digitalised Haj management system

ISLAMABAD: The religious affairs ministry and the information technology ministry on Tuesday signed a memorandum of understanding to introduce a digitalised Haj management system for transparency. The agreement marks a key step towards an end-to-end digital model for Haj 2027, seeking to streamline procedures from application submission to pilgrims’ return to Pakistan. The MoU signing ceremony in the federal capital was attended by Federal Minister for Religious Affairs and Interfaith Harmony...

I spent 60 hours traveling on Amtrak trains from New York to Texas. Here are 10 things that surprised me most.
CultureBusiness Insider9d ago

I spent 60 hours traveling on Amtrak trains from New York to Texas. Here are 10 things that surprised me most.

I rode two Amtrak trains on a long-haul journey from New York to Texas. Michael Rosenthal I spent 60 hours in coach across two Amtrak trains to get from New York to Austin via Chicago. Getting to see historic landmarks and beautiful views was a pleasant surprise. The delays got tedious and a bit frustrating, but the train felt like home by the end of my trip. Spending 60 hours on Amtrak trains in coach isn't ideal for a lot of people. Fortunately, I don't mind a long ride. To get from New York to Austin, I booked two different Amtrak routes that would take me to Texas via Chicago. Ultimately, my long journey over several days was pretty nice. After this trip, I'd still say Amtrak trains are one of the most pleasant and enjoyable modes of travel. Here are a few things that surprised me about the 60-hour ride. At times, I forgot I was even on a train. Sometimes I forgot I was even on a train. Michael Rosenthal Local train rides can be slow and clunky, so I prefer long-distance ones — you can largely sit back, relax, and enjoy the journey because the stops are much farther apart. The ride was smooth and enjoyable, and I watched the country pass by right outside my window, as if I were watching TV or a movie. Sometimes I was so distracted by a conversation with someone else on board that I forgot we were moving. However, there's also a lot of potential for delays. Many Amtrak lines run on a single track. Michael Rosenthal Long-distance trains are great when they run properly, but delays can be tough to avoid. Amtrak mostly operates on freight railroad lines, which means you're often at the mercy of those dispatchers. To make matters worse, some lines run on a single track. So if there's an oncoming train, you have to wait on a track siding until it clears. Freight trains can cause anywhere from 10 minutes to multiple hours of interference. These delays — which came every hour or so on my trip — interrupted the joy and relaxation that came with the otherwise smooth ride. Sometimes passengers didn't receive announcements about delays, or only got vague ones. I wish I'd brought a radio scanner that picked up on the frequencies used by the dispatchers so I could stay up to date on the information or estimate the delay time myself. Many passengers relied on the café car for food. I mostly ate the food I brought from home. Michael Rosenthal I brought enough of my own food for my two and a half days on the rails, and my short layover in Chicago gave me a chance to grab a hot meal. I also packed a reusable bottle so I could fill it up with tap water on the train. However, I was surprised by how many people depended on Amtrak's onboard dining options. The café car is OK in a pinch: It has basic snacks, beverages, and hot foods like burgers and pizza. The prices aren't unreasonable, but I still don't think they're worth it for food that generally gets taken out of a plastic wrapper and microwaved. I expected more people to get off the train to stretch their legs at the stops. I wanted to take the opportunity to stretch my legs in fresh air. Michael Rosenthal Every so often, the train made an extended stop at a station for a crew change or servicing, and passengers were allowed to step off for a bit. There's no smoking on the trains, so I noticed a fair number of people using these stops as smoke breaks. However, I expected more people to take the opportunity to get some fresh air and stretch, rather than stay on the train. There were only so many of these opportunities, and it was great to walk around, feel some sun on my face, and say that I set foot in a different place, instead of just passing through it. The history all around me felt remarkable. We passed through so many interesting towns. Michael Rosenthal My trip took me through more than a dozen states, including six state capitals and the US capital. The trip from New York to Washington, DC, started out on tracks that were part of the historical Pennsylvania Railroad and continued down one of the busiest rail corridors in the country. The bulk of my Cardinal-line trip went along old Chesapeake and Ohio Railway tracks. There was a lot of interesting history to learn about the railroad towns that sprang up along the tracks when they were first laid. My trip through Virginia took me across tracks that played a vital role in the Civil War. The train also traveled through old boom-and-bust towns in West Virginia — some of which still exist, but others have only scant remnants. There was no WiFi on the Texas Eagle line. The coach car on an Amtrak train. Michael Rosenthal The Texas Eagle is one of the few Amtrak trains that doesn't have WiFi, and some areas we passed through had little-to-no cell reception. The Cardinal line also passed through areas with poor cell reception, which made the onboard WiFi quite unstable. For this reason, I'm glad I brought an AM/FM HD radio with me. I had a lot of fun tuning in to different stations as my trains traveled the country. It helped me feel more connected to the small towns and gave them more life. I found surprisingly good content in some remote areas. I didn't really end up watching all of the entertainment I downloaded. I mostly ate the food I brought from home. Michael Rosenthal I came prepared for my train ride by downloading a bunch of TV shows and movies onto my laptop. However, surprisingly, the 60 hours went by so quickly that I didn't watch any of them. I only kept my laptop open on the Cardinal line to look at Amtrak's "Track Your Train" map. I was also having too much fun with the radio and didn't want to miss out on live broadcasts. Plus, I could continue fully taking in the sights out the window while listening. The train was a very social place at times, too, so I was often busy speaking with the people around me. The camaraderie with other passengers is second to none. I met a lot of interesting people on my trains. Michael Rosenthal The camaraderie I've experienced on Amtrak train rides is pretty much unmatched. I didn't get to talk with as many people as I have on past trips, but it was still enjoyable to journey together with a bunch of people for such an extended time. It was great to see others get off at their destinations, but, in a funny way, it also made me a little sad to see them (and the ways they contributed to the train's atmosphere) go. Getting to spend time with fellow passengers from all over the world while different parts of the country passed by provided some true slices of American life. There was no observation car on the Texas Eagle during my trip. I had to make due with the views from my window. Michael Rosenthal It's great to switch things up by sitting and socializing in the café cars. However, the Cardinal and Texas Eagle trains have combined café and dining cars, so seating was very limited and only for passengers who purchased something. I missed hanging out in observation cars, as I've done on past trips. I knew this would be the case for my time on the Cardinal, but the Texas Eagle usually has an awesome sightseeing lounge with a variety of seating and viewing windows. The fact that my train didn't have one was by far the biggest disappointment of the trip. However, the Eagle has since brought back its observation cars. It's definitely worth checking whether your train has an observation car before booking a long Amtrak ride. I fell into a routine on the train that made it feel like home. Michael Rosenthal When you spend enough time somewhere, it can start to feel very familiar and comfortable, which was my case on the train. Doing things like making room while walking in the aisle so someone else can pass, heading down the stairs to the bathroom, and refilling water bottles felt as routine as anything I'd do at home. There was almost a weird comfort in walking around and seeing different parts of the train that became very familiar to me during my many hours aboard. This story was originally published on November 9, 2021, and most recently updated on February 17, 2025. Read the original article on Business Insider

Google puts users at risk by downplaying health disclaimers under AI Overviews
TechnologyThe Guardian11d ago

Google puts users at risk by downplaying health disclaimers under AI Overviews

Exclusive: Google fails to include safety warnings when users are first presented with AI-generated medical advice Google is putting people at risk of harm by downplaying safety warnings that its AI-generated medical advice may be wrong. When answering queries about sensitive topics such as health, the company says its AI Overviews, which appear above search results, prompt users to seek professional help, rather than relying solely on its summaries. “AI Overviews will inform people when it’s important to seek out expert advice or to verify the information presented,” Google has said. Continue reading...