Dei circa 83 miliardi di prestiti che il Piano di Ripresa europeo aveva riservato alla Spagna, Madrid ne ha usati 21,5 e ha lasciato il resto sul tavolo di Bruxelles. ...

Leggi tutto

As Mainers continue to target Sen. Susan Collins’ office with protests following a recent killing by an immigration agent, new reporting shows how some of the $70 billion she and her GOP colleagues gave to President Donald Trump’s immigration agencies is being spent.

According to the Associated Press on Tuesday:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers may soon be outfitted with gloves that can deliver painful electric shocks intended to gain compliance from combative individuals.

ICE plans to spend up to $20 million to purchase thousands of “conductive distraction and de-escalation devices” for officers and agents by March, according to a notice published Monday by the Department of Homeland Security.

The devices are known as the GLOVE, which stands for Generated Low Output Voltage Emitter, and are manufactured by Compliant Technologies LLC of Lexington, Kentucky. They have been used in recent years by some jails and police departments.

As the company’s website explains, “the discomfort associated with the stimulation is usually effective in bringing individuals into compliance in less than three seconds and leaves no burns, marks, or scars.” It describes them as a “humane, low-optics, de-escalation solution for many situations facing our men and women in uniform.”

As if ICE wasn’t sadistic enough, the agency plans to spend up to $20 million to give officers gloves that can deliver painful electric shockshttps://t.co/y5yMRYecLr

— Thomas Kennedy (@tomaskenn) August 12, 2026

John Peters, president of the Institute for the Prevention of In-Custody Deaths, told the AP that the sensation is “immediate and sharp,” comparing it to a “bee sting.”

While he said it could be an effective tool to prevent “resistance,” he warned that it should not be used as a form of punishment against those merely exhibiting “verbal defiance or belligerence” or on high-risk populations such as children, pregnant women, or elderly or disabled people.

But given the recent record of rampant civil rights abuses, extrajudicial killings, excessive use of force, and efforts to lie about misconduct, civil rights advocates are warning that these gloves are being placed into, or onto, the exact wrong hands.

“ICE spent the last year showing this country that they are willing to disregard the law and are too quick to use force, with devastating and at times fatal consequences for citizens and noncitizens alike,” Jenn Rolnick Borchetta, deputy director on policing at the American Civil Liberties Union, told Common Dreams. “Now they might be equipped with a device that allows them to deliver an electric shock with their hands by pushing a small button, in a move that might be imperceptible to those watching.”

Kica Matos, president of the National Immigration Law Center, concurred, telling Common Dreams that ICE is a “rogue agency with an $80 billion slush fund that allows them to concoct and fund new ways to visit cruelty upon our communities.”

“Arming poorly trained agents with electric shock gloves to inflict pain on our neighbors is disgusting and barbaric,” Matos added. “Congress must end the blank check to ICE, and ICE must get out of our communities.”

The shock gloves are just one way that immigration agencies are spending the $70 billion in additional funding they were given back in June, when Republicans in the Senate voted 52-47 to authorize the funding despite rampant lawlessness. Only one Republican, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), voted against supercharging the funding.

In a July 16 letter to Democratic Gov. Janet Mills, Collins defended her vote for the increased ICE funding by pointing to “reforms” passed in April as part of the Department of Homeland Security’s broader appropriations bill, which included $20 million for body cameras and $2 million for “de-escalation” training.

Collins’ office did not immediately respond when asked by Common Dreams whether she believes electric shock gloves were a good form of “de-escalation.”

A five-term senator in the midst of a fierce reelection bid against Democrat Troy Jackson has taken fierce criticism for her vote to support ICE on the campaign trail, which has only grown in intensity since July’s fatal shooting of 25-year-old Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Biddeford.

It was one of two fatal shootings of men without criminal records over the course of a week. ICE later acknowledged that the victims were not the target of their operations.

When asked after the shooting, Collins declined to say that she regretted her vote for increased ICE funding.

Protesters who gathered outside Collins’ Biddeford office on Tuesday said she should.

“$70 billion to fund the terror that left my family and community in fear,” Fernanda McLaughlin, a Maine resident and community organizer, said over the loudspeaker, according to NBC News Center Maine. “You know what that money can be really used for? To feed Mainers. To fund our schools. To fund our health system.”

“There were no guardrails included, and she still voted yes on it,” McLaughlin said. “Simple guardrails that exist in nearly every other law enforcement agency across our nation.”

by Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio – founder and director of Gospa News

VERSIONE IN ITALIANO 

Trump’s Crazy Contradictions on COVID Vaccines

Once again, US President Donald Trump shows he wants to be a double-crosser on riding a wild horse that could unseat him at any moment…

During the White House press conference on the reduction of the US vaccination plan from 17 to 11 vaccines (still one more than Italy after the Lorenzin Decree came into force) and on the renewed safety program on the alarm about correlation between pediatric vaccines and autism (censored by the CDC) he was questioned by a journalist about the issue of the day…

VITAL! US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) on AUTISM AND VACCINES: “Studies supporting a link IGNORED by Health Authorities”

President Trump drops this response to Dr. Fauci being exposed for privately admitting that the COVID vaccine may be linked to miscarriages.

“The Biden administration was a disaster in every way. That would be just one way, but they’ve been a disaster in every single one. It’s unimaginable what they did. “

It’s a shame that this comes after his repeated statements about the success of Operation Warp Speed, with which he himself funded, during the first Trump administration, the production of Moderna’s Spikevax COVID-19 vaccine, developed by Cambridge-based Big Pharma in close collaboration with the military agency DARPA and Fauci himself…

The Moderna vaccine itself was deemed by the WHO to be the most dangerous for pregnant women and therefore not recommended (read below).

Therefore, Trump is fully complicit in the Biden-Fauci disaster, which is why the former White House medical advisor will most likely never go to jail… Indeed, after the November 2026 midterm elections, the issue will likely evaporate from the horizon of Republican senators who are denouncing the scandals.

US SENATE VOTES TO INDICT FAUCI, Trump agrees (2 Videos). The Virologist: “They want me BEHIND BARS”. Why Prosecuting him for SARS-COV-2 Manmade and Lethal Covid Vaccines may be Off Limits

Fauci and CDC knew about the risk of miscarriage linked to mRNA Covid vaccines

Newly released government text messages (source 1) reveal that Dr. Anthony Fauci privately raised concerns in January 2021 that the immune response following the second COVID-19 “vaccine” dose could trigger miscarriage during the first trimester of pregnancy.

In a text exchange involving then-CDC Director Rochelle Walensky and Vivek Murthy, Fauci noted that fever and the heightened immune response following dose two “theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester.”

The messages are part of a soon-to-be released cache containing more than 34,000 texts and 522 voicemails recovered from Fauci’s government-issued phone and released by Senators Ron Johnson and Rand Paul (source 2)

We recall that Fauci was charged with contempt of Congress after refusing to answer 111 questions from the Senate Committee established to shed light on manmade SARS-CoV-2 and the censorship related to the risks of mRNA vaccines.

At the heart of the story is a January 2021 text message exchange between Fauci, Vivek Murthy (then Surgeon General), and Rochelle Walensky (then CDC director). In those messages, Fauci wrote that “there is no data or theoretical reason to believe that vaccination is preferable early rather than late in pregnancy.” (source 3)

Pregnant Women’s Concerns About the Genetic Vaccine and Fauci’s Private Confirmation

He also highlighted a warning that would later prove prophetic.

“However, some people (including female healthcare workers) have concerns about administering a ‘genetic’ vaccine in the very early stages of pregnancy,” he wrote.

“The COVID mRNA SHOTS qualify as GENE THERAPY according to the EU’s definition” Eminent Canadian Bioimmunologist Jessica Rose sentenced

Nearly two hours passed before Fauci returned to the topic with an aspect he hadn’t mentioned the first time. “I asked around a bit more and another issue came up that you need to be aware of,” he wrote.

“Since many people have significant cytokine storm and fever after the 2nd dose, this heoretically could be associated with miscarriage  in the 1st trimester .”

This exchange was never reflected in Fauci’s public statements. On February 3, 2021, in a JAMA livestream event, he stated that the FDA had found “no warning signs” regarding pregnant women.

The White House Advisor’s Lies About Risks to Pregnant Women – VIDEO

Months later, as White House medical advisor, he claimed that the CDC data showed “no indication” of additional risks, arguing that pregnant women should be vaccinated.

“It’s pretty clear that pregnant women should be vaccinated,” he stated. Here he is, in the video reposted on X by Senator Ron Johnson, confidently recommending the vaccination of pregnant women with a smile.

«Fauci on August 30, 2021: “it’s really one of those things that’s kind of not a close call. It really is pretty clear that pregnant women should get vaccinated.”But 7 months earlier he was concerned that the second dose of the COVID shot “theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester» Senator Johnson comments (source 4).

The messages also show how the three officials weighed the vaccine’s risk-benefit balance against that of the virus, while worrying about public statements that could undermine pregnant women’s confidence in COVID vaccination.

On January 26, 2021, Murthy told Fauci and Walensky that he was “surprised to see the WHO issue a strong statement saying they do not recommend Moderna [sic] for pregnant women,”calling it “a strong statement to make and potentially quite damaging to public confidence among pregnant women.”

A 2024 study confirmed 37 adverse events in pregnancy

«The revelation takes on added significance in light of a recent peer-reviewed pregnancy safety study by Dr. James Thorp and colleagues» writes American epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher in an article published on his Substack Focal Points. (source 5).

Using CDC/FDA VAERS data through April 26, 2024, they examined 37 pregnancy and newborn adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination and found that every one of the 37 exceeded the CDC/FDA safety signal statistical threshold.

These included miscarriage, fetal malformations, chromosomal abnormalities, placental disorders, fetal growth restriction, premature delivery, stillbirth, neonatal asphyxia, and newborn death.

Alarmingly, the study reported a COVID-19 vaccine miscarriage proportional reporting ratio (PRR) of 114 compared with influenza vaccination and 38.4 compared with all other vaccines.

Gospa News had already denounced the problem in February 2021,by analyzing the data from pharmacovigilance platforms in advance, reporting 3,573 cases of fetal death among the adverse reactions of women vaccinated with mRNA gene sera for Covid-19.

3,573 Fetal Deaths in VAERS Following COVID-19 Vaccines: 1,867% Increase Over Non-COVID Vaccines

Epidemiologist Hulscher: “Vaccines administered despite the risk of miscarriage: It’s diabolical.”

«In simple terms, official CDC/FDA data showed miscarriage was reported far more disproportionately after COVID-19 vaccination than after other vaccines—creating an unusually large safety signal» Hulsher commented

«While senior federal health officials were privately discussing miscarriage risk in January 2021, they went on to aggressively push COVID-19 mRNA injections during pregnancy. Years later, a peer-reviewed analysis found all 37 pregnancy and newborn adverse events examined breached safety-signal thresholds. That is diabolical» the epidemiologist concluded.

It should be remembered that in clinical trials of a new drug, pregnant women, just like the elderly and those more vulnerable due to pre-existing conditions, are generally excluded for safety reasons related to the protection of the fetus and the mother.

The Alarm about the Risk of Miscarriages in Vaccinated Women, raised by Gospa News in 2021

Despite this, once authorized under an emergency measure, vaccines were administered to pregnant women, just as they were to the most vulnerable individuals, even after the publication of numerous medical studies in world-renowned scientific journals that attempted to immediately raise the alarm, promptly reported by Gospa News in multiple investigations since 2021.

“Risks of Miscarriage from mRNA Vaccines”. New Zealand Scientists wrote in a Research: “Stop Gene Serums for Pregnant Women and Babies”

Because of these articles, our online newspaper has been censored on almost all socials by international and Italian fact-checkers, and we will soon reveal yet another shameful fact about them, just discovered…

This is why the contribution of our readers is important.

Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio – founder and director of Gospa News

MAIN SOURCES AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ARTICLE

HELP GOSPA NEWS WITH A FREE DONATION via PayPal or Bank

---

APPENDIX – Walensky Aware of Miscarriage Concern, Still Pushed C-19 Vaccine for Pregnant Women

by John Leak – originally published on Substack Focal Points

McCullough Foundation epidemiologist and administer just posted NEWLY RELEASED FAUCI TEXTS REVEAL HE PRIVATELY WARNED COVID SHOT COULD TRIGGER MISCARRIAGE.

On January 25, 2021, he texted then CDC Director Rochelle Walensky the following.

Nevertheless, in April 2021, Walensky had a published conversation with Dr. Eric J. Rubin (editor of TheNew England Journal of Medicine) in which she vehemently advocated COVID-19 vaccination for pregnant women, even though it hadn’t been tested on pregnant women (source 6).

This was a flagrant violation of the “Golden Rule of pregnancy”—namely, that novel and/or potentially harmful substances are never used when new human life is being formed and nurtured within the womb.

At this time, Drs. Peter McCullough and James Thorp were totally shocked by her recommendation, as both doctors had long taken it for granted that we’d already learned this lesson the hard way from the diethylstilbestrol (DES) and thalidomide disasters.

INFANTICIDE! 4,739 Dead Babies in VAERS Following COVID-19 Shots Injected Into Pregnant and Child-Bearing Aged Women

After Walensky’s approval, millions of pregnant women who wouldn’t have dared drink a solitary glass of wine lined up to get an experimental genetic shot that had been developed “at warp speed.”

Given that Walensky is herself a mother of three children, it strikes me as especially bizarre that she would make this recommendation just two months after hearing Dr. Fauci’s concern about miscarriage risk.

John Leak – originally published on Substack Focal Points

MAIN SOURCES

Source 1 – RON JOHNSON – FAUCI SMS

Source 2 – PEER REVIEWED SAFETY STUDY

Source 3 – ZERO-HEDGE

Source 4 – SEN. RON JOHNSON X

Source 5 – NEWLY RELEASED FAUCI TEXTS REVEAL HE PRIVATELY WARNED COVID SHOT COULD TRIGGER MISCARRIAGE.

Source 6 – Eric J. Rubin, Lindsey R. Baden, Rochelle P. Walensky, and Stephen Morrissey. Audio Interview: Covid-19 Vaccines and Pregnancy — A Conversation with CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, April 21, 2021, N Engl J Med 2021;384: e73, DOI: 10.1056/NEJMe2106836, VOL. 384 NO. 16.

---

RELATED POST

TRUMP Begins Fight vs BIG TECH “CENSORSHIP CARTEL” & Fact-Checking firm NEWSGUARD (our Persecutor)

---

 

“Mathematics Is a Live Performance.” Misha Verbitsky on Intelligent Mold, Non-Consensus Realities, and Aesthetics as the Last Refuge of Human Reason

In June 2026, the mathematician Misha Verbitsky ended up in an Armenian jail, caught in the automatic machinery of intergovernmental agreements that Russia has pressed into service for political persecution. Starting from that story of police and politics, his conversation with T-invariant editor Alexander Sergeev turns steadily more philosophical. How is polarization destroying scientific unity? Why doesn’t a powerful intellect protect anyone from insane ideas? And how does the “intelligent mold” of AI call into question both human cognitive exceptionalism and the value of mathematical truth, returning us to first principles — the joy of communication and pure aesthetics?

Top news on scientists’ work and experiences during the war, along with videos and infographics — subscribe to the T-invariant Telegram channel to stay updated.

“Flagged”: A Convention Abused

With Russia’s war against Ukraine grinding on, Armenia has a reputation as an excellent place for people from Russia and from the world beyond the former Soviet space to meet. Pashinyan’s pro-Western course, the country’s pointed friendliness toward Russians who have relocated there, and direct flights to and from Russia all create the impression of a protected zone. That is why Yerevan was chosen for a reunion of alumni of Moscow’s School No. 57, an elite math-and-physics school. For Misha Verbitsky, who works in Brazil, these are close friends — almost a second family. But the illusion of safety dissolved at passport control: instead of a reunion with his classmates, three days went by in a police cell at the airport.

T-invariant: So you had no worries at all before the flight?

Misha Verbitsky: None — and that was a mistake, obviously. I should have been more careful. On arrival, right there at passport control, there’s a long, drawn-out fuss; then they walk you down corridors for quite a while and hand you over to the police. The police slap handcuffs on me, march me off somewhere far away again, and inform me that I’m being held for three days, then there’s a court hearing, and then I’ll spend another 30 days waiting to be deported to Russia.

T-i: Where were you held?

MV: Right there in the airport, in a small cell with bars on it. They kept saying an investigator was on his way. That went on for about six hours.

T-i: If there’s an investigator, doesn’t there have to be a lawyer too?

MV: No. No lawyer was part of the plan. The investigator never showed up either. But those particular officers were fairly kind to me and let me use my cell phone. I didn’t call anyone, I just fired off a message. Pretty soon my wife came rushing over, along with some classmates. And they brought a lawyer — the wonderful Vache Simonyan, who was a huge help to us. He explained afterward how it works: they hold you for 72 hours with no investigator and no lawyer, waiting for Russia to confirm whether it actually wants the person. Russia then has to supply court documents for the extradition to proceed. After three days the court rules, and the ruling is almost always the same: another 30–40 days behind bars while the full set of paperwork arrives from Russia. Then the court checks whether Armenian law contains any provision criminalizing whatever the person is being extradited for. Along the way — during the first 15 days — you can apply for refugee status, provided you have a lawyer. I actually managed to file, just in case. It doesn’t help much, though: you still can’t leave Armenia, and there’s a fair chance you’ll be locked up anyway.

T-i: Did they present anything? Any grounds?

MV: Well, they had a criminal charge written down there.

T-i: That was everything anyone knew for three days? No signals from Russia?

MV: Russia verbally demanded that I be held pending extradition and promised to send the official request later. But no fully formal demand ever arrived. Normally the Armenians respond favorably to an informal request like that and detain the person. They didn’t do that with me, because a big fuss blew up. Formally, Armenia did everything by the book — after all, Russia failed to produce the documents on time.

T-i: And Russia Day (June 12) [Russia’s national holiday — T-invariant] fell on a Friday. Did the long weekend help you?

MV: Absolutely! They were all just off drinking.

My sense is that they weren’t especially invested in nailing me. Somebody snitched, a case got opened… There isn’t really any purpose behind it. This enormous machine runs more or less on its own, without thinking about anyone in particular. One little cog turns, catches on another… Or maybe not… Because back in early 2024, a whole batch of articles came out in Russia attacking the math department [at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics, where Verbitsky taught — T-invariant] and me personally. It was a smear campaign against the people there who were, let’s say, politically unreliable. The wording was hilarious: supposedly I had founded some sort of “club of Russia-haters.”

T-i: Did the noise in the press and in the community actually help?

MV: Oh, “help” is putting it mildly — it saved me. Because once they let me out after 72 hours, there was still a risk of getting stranded. They handed me a paper saying they had no claims against me, but I was still red-flagged. Meaning that at a border crossing, in the best case they simply don’t let me through, and in the worst the handcuffs come back out. And for ordinary people — I was in a privileged position — there’s only one solution: wait for a “humanitarian corridor.” That’s when, at the request of human rights organizations or the ombudsman, the border guards briefly lower the red flag that’s keeping you from crossing. Then you have to drive to Georgia immediately — you can’t buy a plane ticket in advance, since nobody knows when the border will open up.

T-i: What is this flag, exactly, and what database is it in? People mentioned the Chișinău Convention. Does it have anything to do with Interpol?

MV: No, no. Back in 2002 the CIS countries [the Commonwealth of Independent States, the post-Soviet bloc — T-invariant] drew up a convention on sharing judicial data and handing over criminals. Interestingly, Russia formally joined it only in 2023. And Chișinău itself — that is, Moldova — isn’t a party to it.

T-INVARIANT BACKGROUNDER

The CIS conventions On Legal Assistance…

The Chișinău Convention (2002) replaces, for the countries that signed it, the earlier Minsk Convention (1993). Both cover extradition, among other things. The Chișinău text is more carefully drafted: it spells out procedures for cooperation and options for the defense more clearly, but it also lowers the threshold for extradition — from charges carrying a minimum of one year in prison down to six months. On paper, both conventions rule out politically motivated extradition, but in practice that provision often fails. In the 1990s all 12 CIS countries signed the Minsk Convention. Eight of them have since switched to the Chișinău version. The only country to have denounced it is Ukraine (in 2024). Three remain under the Minsk Convention: Turkmenistan, Moldova, and Georgia, which left the CIS in 2009. The latter two apply it only in a limited way — to the extent that it doesn’t conflict with the legal principles of the European Court of Human Rights. Even there, however, a politically motivated Russian extradition request can lead to detention and the need for legal assistance.

The Rozysk (“Wanted”) database on the website of Russia’s Interior Ministry is blocked from abroad — you need a Russian VPN service to reach it. For a preliminary check, you can download a copy of the database that the outlet Mediazona updates on GitHub from time to time. The version currently posted there is from March 2026. It lists 187,000 people, including 72,000 who were in the database earlier but were later removed.

T-i: A class reunion is a private affair, of course, but technically it’s no different from traveling to a scientific conference or a work meeting. So does that mean the CIS countries are closed to anyone flagged in Russia? Armenia and Kazakhstan included — the very places so many people moved to after leaving Russia…

MV: Definitely. But there’s a difference. In its entire history Armenia has extradited only a handful of people, and nearly all of them were genuine criminals, not political cases. It usually won’t hand over people charged with economic crimes either, if there’s reason to think the case is political. Kazakhstan, on the other hand, extradites practically everyone.

T-i: Until recently, the CIS countries served as neutral ground where scientists from Russia and from the rest of the world, including Russian émigrés, could interact. Is that neutral ground now gradually disappearing?

MV: Unfortunately, yes. And Europe, too, is methodically closing its borders to anyone with a Russian passport. Never mind that Europe has now started handing refugees over to Russia. America extradites them as well. In general, I recommend Latin America to everyone. They still have visa-free travel with Russia and very lenient laws… Extradition treaties formally exist, but the question is whether anyone will actually apply them. Which, by the way, I have yet to find out for myself.

T-i: Lawyers say that if you carry a Russian “black mark” — extremism, terrorism, and the like — then traveling to Brazil, say, means preparing documents in advance to explain your case.

MV: Absolutely — you’ll have to hire a lawyer right away. But in all the time I’ve lived in Brazil, I’ve never once been detained. When it does happen, the principle is simple: political cases don’t get extradited, in any form. But proving that a case is political takes effort and money, obviously. And the noise will start up all over again.

The Surrender of Reason: Between Propaganda and Heresy

Mathematics has always been a connected space. That wholeness is sustained by networks of teacher-to-student descent — as at School No. 57 — and by shared standards of intellectual quality that, as the mathematician Vitaly Arnold liked to put it, citing his colleague Michael Tsfasman, teach you to tell “a claim that has actually been made from one that hasn’t, and a proved claim from an unproved one.” But politics keeps methodically attacking that connectedness. And it isn’t only outright bans on collaboration; there are internal barriers as well, when building an elaborate case for insane ideas turns into a kind of intellectual challenge and a form of psychological defense.

T-i: How do political, legal, and ideological obstacles affect actual scientific work? Is today’s fragmentation of the mathematical community comparable to that of the Soviet period?

MV: Under Soviet rule you couldn’t so much as mention a mathematician who had left the country. It simply didn’t get past the censors. And you couldn’t send a paper to a foreign journal, either. There were clever ways around that. Yuri Ivanovich Manin, for instance, knew of a mailbox from which letters actually got through. Meaning there was a clerk sitting there who had decided not to stop mail addressed to scientific journals. That’s how some of his papers, and his students’ papers, ended up published in the West.

T-i: So it wasn’t even a ban as such — the letters just didn’t arrive?

MV: Oh, there was a ban too: the First Department [the KGB-supervised security office attached to every Soviet institution — T-invariant] simply wouldn’t clear the papers. Only personal correspondence bypassed it. Yuri Ivanovich wrote a paper with Volodya Drinfeld on vector bundles over complex projective spaces, mailed it as an ordinary letter to Atiyah or Hitchin, they added roughly as much text of their own, and published it in a journal. That’s how one of the most famous and most cited papers of all came about: ADHM (Atiyah–Drinfeld–Hitchin–Manin) — everyone still knows that acronym. And all of it happened because Yuri Ivanovich knew the right mailbox.

T-i: Well, email still works, at least. What about publishing?

MV: For a while there were problems. Some American universities ban professional contact with Russian citizens. You can’t invite someone to campus, say. Co-authorship is easier. In Germany they tightened the screws pretty hard at the start of the war, and then began gradually loosening them. I haven’t heard of anyone having a paper turned down by a Western mathematics journal, though in other fields that happens all the time.

For mathematicians in Russia, ties with the West have effectively been replaced by ties with China. Professor Shing-Tung Yau and Professor Gang Tian moved to China a long time ago and are building a fairly modern mathematical structure there. In those two particular circles, at least, mathematics is doing very well. And they’re glad to invite our colleagues from Russia.

T-i: Many colleagues in Russia support Putin’s war…

MV: …more than half of them, by my estimate.

T-i: Is professional common ground with them eroding? Can you still work on mathematical problems with them across such sharp ideological divides?

MV: Hell if I know. Take me: I’m pro-Israel. And I suspect that an enormous number of my Western colleagues are anti-Israel, because they’ve signed some nasty thing or other against Israel. That upsets me, of course, but it doesn’t stop me from talking to them. On the other hand, I have two co-authors who used to be close friends, and then, when the anti-Israel demonstrations broke out, the anti-Israel one stopped speaking to the one who’s mildly pro-Israel: for him that was beyond the pale.

T-i: So the Israel question is even more destructive to relationships right now than the Russian one?

MV: No question. I have friends whose views are pure vatnik [Russian slang for a knee-jerk pro-Kremlin patriot — T-invariant]. But they’re mathematicians, and that has never stopped me. Although, on the other hand, take Lyosha Bondal, a great Russian mathematician and an active supporter of the “special military operation” [the Kremlin’s official term for the war against Ukraine — T-invariant], who recently tore into me on Facebook — specifically over political views.

T-i: How does it happen that people with a scientific cast of mind — mathematicians, of all people — stop thinking rationally in the social and political sphere and end up holding views that are sometimes completely insane?

MV: The two go together beautifully. It’s well known that the higher a person’s intelligence, the better he is at finding online support for absolutely delusional ideas. Bondal, again, read Dmitry Yevgenyevich Galkovsky and got swept up in his rather unhinged conspiracy theory, which incidentally incorporates an expanded version of Fomenkoism [the pseudohistorical “New Chronology” of the mathematician Anatoly Fomenko, which holds that ancient and medieval history was invented — T-invariant].

T-i: Yes, I’ve run into smart people passionately defending a literalist reading of biblical myth and treating it as an intellectual challenge…

MV: I was rereading an old essay by Dugin the other day — about all the gore in Platonov’s Chevengur, and about how the meaning of the Russian national idea is to spill as much blood as possible and then do yourself in. Sorokin has that wonderful Platonov pastiche in Blue Lard — the bit about the “slice-hauler.” He later expanded the slice-hauler into an entire book, but it came out far better in Blue Lard. Reading that in 1999, I wondered whether I could make myself believe it: that this ultimate slaughter of human beings really is the bright future for everyone. That sort of exercise — placing yourself inside a particular intellectual framework and working within it — is pretty absorbing. I played around with Fomenkoism for a while too, coming up with ways to explain why a conspiratorial chronology might make some kind of sense. That was an entertaining pastime as well.

Fomenko has successors these days, by the way — it’s called “Great Tartaria.” An entire community, and one that has penetrated fairly deep into the West. Based on an analysis of the amount of mud on the streets of Moscow, they believe that a nuclear war took place at the end of the 17th century. Great Mongolia (also known as Tartaria), which ruled the whole world, was destroyed, and then history was rewritten to conspiratorially shrink it down to the size of Russia.

T-i: Along similar lines, I’ve come across the claim that theology is the branch of mathematics that studies the logical consequences of the axiom that an omnipotent being exists.

MV: Yes, that goes back to Gödel — who was always more or less crazy to begin with, but kept going off his rocker more and more as he went on. He was a genius, after all, and geniuses have a way of being madmen. And right at the very end he wrote a very good mathematical proof of the existence of God. The problem is that it proves the existence not only of God but also of Cthulhu and every other infernal character out of Lovecraft. Which is to say, we don’t really understand what it is he proved. It was Anselm’s ontological argument — he rewrote it in mathematical symbols, very convincingly.

The Elephant in Leiden’s China Shop: A Declaration of Schism

Lately the polarization over artificial intelligence has become as fraught as the political fault lines themselves. On one side, AI opens up astonishing new possibilities; on the other, it generates a garden of forking paths in which anyone can find a narrative to suit his taste. Both have the potential to devalue human beings and their aspirations. Reacting to the arrival of AI, the mathematical community has tried to cement a reality that is slipping away and to prolong the “golden age” of mathematical infallibility. Hundreds of researchers signed the Leiden Declaration on artificial intelligence and mathematics (Russian AI translation), which articulates five fundamental values of the discipline. The catch is that, in order to defend those values against AI, the declaration calls for boycotting anyone who does not share them (AI corporations first and foremost), for seeking help from the state, and for tightening copyright protection.

T-i: The Leiden Declaration states that its goal is to unite the mathematical community, but what it actually calls for is division: a rigid ethical doctrine, instructions on how to comply with it, a call to boycott those who disagree…

MV: That’s a very interesting reading. What I got out of it was a set of sugar-glazed banalities — “the sky is blue,” “the sun rises in the east” — along with a great deal of verbal filler — to be nice. I’m not thrilled with the text, but that’s more because it’s a total artistic failure than because of any ideas in it, which I simply didn’t find. Then again, maybe I just read it badly.

T-i: What do you make of the call to support state institutions out of distrust of the AI companies, whose tools could make mathematical knowledge unverifiable for anyone without expensive equipment?

MV: Well, that’s a tug-of-war: we have quite a few advanced systems capable of “unpacking” mathematical texts, and until recently almost all of them were American. The Europeans had nothing of the sort — so this is their way of signaling to their governments: “We’re falling behind here, help us out.”

T-i: The declaration’s authors are worried about mathematics becoming dependent on large, expensive systems. A pencil and paper used to be enough; now you need powerful AI, the way physicists need a collider and astronomers need big telescopes. Add neural-network hallucinations to that, and in terms of accessibility and reliability mathematics ends up on a par with the natural sciences.

MV: Mathematics is already on a par with the natural sciences — our proofs play the same role experiments do. All that happens is that one more instrument for mathematical research appears. Old-school mathematics will probably survive somewhere, but in certain areas not using this instrument will be flat-out absurd.

T-i: Something else that alarmed me was the call to give mathematicians the right to forbid AI training on their papers. Copyright is an outdated and burdensome construct as it is, and this would inflate it further.

MV: For that sort of thing people should just get a good kicking… Right now any number of artists’ and musicians’ organizations are trying to fight AI trained on their work. This whole fuss over copyright is pure foolishness. Fortunately, at the moment you can’t really extract works from an LLM. But there are attempts to pass laws requiring LLMs to disclose what came from where.

If they pass, everything collapses. Because then you’ll be able to sue over copyright. The lawyers will come swarming in… Why is medicine so expensive in America? Because you need a lawyer for every sneeze. The same thing will happen to AI — it’ll simply be trampled into the mud. But China won’t be doing any of that. And in order not to fall behind, I don’t think such laws will be passed. Otherwise it’s a catastrophe. In practice, though, the forces of reason have been winning more often than not over the past 20 years.

T-i: How justified is the demand — and it turns up in more places than the Leiden Declaration — that scientific papers must state how AI was used: for what, how extensively, practically down to the prompts?

MV: Right, and nobody is going to do it. In principle it would be nice to know that a paper sent out for review was written with AI. People who use AI ethically are easier to deal with. But it’s the kind of ethics nobody can really observe or explain. I, for instance, use AI only for grant applications — which is formally prohibited, but nobody is tracking it. For writing my own mathematical texts I don’t use AI. I’m even rather pleased that they contain the kinds of characteristic mistakes an AI doesn’t make.

T-i: Isn’t that the same as insisting on writing by hand rather than on a “soulless typewriter”?

MV: Maybe I’m old-fashioned. But I’m afraid that if you crank out ten papers a week, the quality is going to suffer. Doing it by hand keeps me in check a little.

T-i: The astrophysicist Sergei Popov recently urged people to work without AI whenever possible so as not to lose their skills. Then again, if a machine can handle the job, it’s rather beneath a human being to be doing it.

MV: Right now AI is like a bad graduate student. Suppose I’m a big boss with an endless supply of bad grad students. I have them all write texts and then publish under my own name. The students would at least get a little smarter out of it. But AI isn’t going to get any smarter from my efforts, so there’s no benefit. What will happen is that the quality of my own papers slides downhill.

T-i: But there are problems so difficult that you simply don’t have enough time to solve them with your own head. The famous abc conjecture, for instance.

MV: It isn’t clear whether AI will help us with questions like that. It does a decent job on olympiad problems. In combinatorics it has cracked problems people couldn’t solve for years. But on problems at the level of the abc conjecture it’s still the “dim grad student,” with no real progress. As an artistic creator, on the other hand, it’s very interesting — paintings, say, and “plotless” texts. And extremely, extremely prolific.

T-i: The Leiden Declaration also worries about the reliability of mathematical knowledge in the age of AI: it writes proofs that look highly convincing but in fact contain errors.

MV: They look convincing to a fool — or to me, if I’m not a specialist in the particular field.

I’ve been at this every day for a year and I’m used to it by now: it has a certain characteristic “format” it lies in — you just have to learn to recognize it. At one point we spent nearly three months on a single problem. The AI kept confidently telling me it was all obvious. I’d ask it to back that up — and it would hallucinate references at me. And the question was too subtle, too technical, and completely outside my own area. In the end I wrote to a colleague, and he explained the whole thing immediately — in three lines, literally. But there was no getting that out of the AI.

T-i: And when you showed it the specialist’s answer?

MV: I didn’t show it. Show whom? There’s no “audience” in there. It’s like mold (in the good sense of the word) — there’s no central personality. Sometimes I say to it, “Thank you, you were a help,” and explain why. But I think I do that purely out of politeness. It has nowhere to file away even its own great achievements.

The Inscrutable Solaris: Aesthetics and Communication

AI remains a black box even to its creators. Big problems may soon become unmanageable without it — and yet, by putting its trust in this inscrutable oracle, mathematics risks ceasing to be a path of understanding that can be walked step by step. The arrival of AI forces a rethinking of the very role mathematics plays in the system of knowledge. Paradoxically, the discipline is moving away from an idealized pursuit of eternal, unshakable truths at any price and discovering a powerful humanistic potential in itself.

T-i: AI still can’t learn on the fly, but newer models are shedding the hallucinations everyone laughed at in the first few years — six fingers on a hand, that sort of thing. How soon will AI make fewer mistakes in mathematics than people do?

MV: Soon, I hope. But I wouldn’t swear to it. Possibly never.

T-i: What makes you doubt it?

MV: The thing is that large language models think in a completely different way from us. It’s like Lem’s Solaris [the 1961 novel about an ocean-planet whose intelligence defeats every human attempt at contact — T-invariant]. We’ve run into a form of intelligent life that operates on entirely different principles.

I’ve always had this fantasy. There are things called p-adic numbers (a popular explanation from Gemini). The arithmetic there is ordinary, but distance is defined differently: the more times an integer divides evenly by the prime number p, the closer to zero it is. There are even string theory models in which p-adic numbers are used at very small scales instead of the real numbers we’re accustomed to. I used to imagine a civilization whose entire linguistic and conceptual model was built on exactly that kind of p-adic system.

Why AI thinks differently

Since the concept of p-adic numbers isn’t widely known, we asked AI to prepare an explanation of the idea and of the analogy drawn here.

• Claude 3 Sonnet 5 gave a somewhat more thorough explanation.
• Gemini 3.5 Flash wrote something shorter and more vivid, but considerably less accurate. On the other hand, you can pick that chat back up if you want to go deeper.

So, large language models are something else entirely, like Solaris. They complement human beings rather than compete with them. People often say that thinking comes in a “digital” variety — yes or no — and an “analog” one, where everything is fuzzy. With these models everything is far more analog than it is with us; everything flows smoothly into everything else, there are gradients. We have black and white, and they have grayish-brownish-crimson with polka dots. I’m not convinced they’re capable of ever catching on to what a proof is.

T-i: In Vladimir Uspensky’s Apology for Mathematics I came across a wonderful formulation: a proof is “an argument that has to convince us so thoroughly that we ourselves are ready to use it to convince others.”

MV: [gives a thumbs-up] That’s exactly what consensus is! And every era has its own. Some people think there’s some formal way to describe a proof. There isn’t. That formalism was refuted long ago; it doesn’t work.

T-i: If that’s the case, how far can we really call mathematics reliable?

MV: We can’t. There are always errors in it — it’s just that we’re able to correct them: we understand where an error is and where it isn’t, and everything can be agreed on.

T-i: But then we could reach an agreement with AI as well about what we consider an error and what we don’t. Whether we accept the axiom of choice, for instance.

MV: The problem here is a different one. There’s a concept called neuroslop. That’s when, at a prompt engineer’s command, AI churns out so much in a few minutes that checking it would take days. So maybe, instead of checking all that, it’s easier to think it through yourself?

A proof we don’t understand is of no interest to anyone. I mean, what difference does it make that a map can be colored with four colors? It’s just a curious fact proved in a curious way. It doesn’t move anybody.

There are other problems with very long proofs, too. Take the story of Shinichi Mochizuki and his “Hodge theaters.” In 2012 he published a three-thousand-page work that is utterly unreadable. I know him well, as it happens — I was his assistant at one point, and even then he wrote incomprehensibly. He’s very smart, and he spent thirty years in isolation working on that long text.

An entire subculture formed around that work. Some people landed large grants — acquaintances of mine among them — to study it. In the end there were attempts to simplify the text, irreparable errors came to light, and the subject gradually petered out. Nobody cites it, and we never really got any accepted results out of it — the community didn’t recognize them as correct, and most likely they’re simply wrong. Though maybe they’re right — who knows. The same thing will happen with AI. There’ll be some text, an incunabulum of sorts, a 500,000-page grimoire that nobody will ever open.

T-i: So what mathematics values isn’t whether a result has been proved as such, but whether the community has understood it? And a result that lies beyond the community’s cognitive reach isn’t a result at all?

MV: It’s more that aesthetics is what lies at the base of mathematics. If a result is beautiful, we like it. If it isn’t beautiful, we don’t — and if it’s also very difficult, then to hell with it. Life isn’t infinite, and you can’t study everything.

T-i: But isn’t the four color theorem a very beautiful result?

MV: No, not beautiful in the slightest. The statement is beautiful; the proof isn’t. Why would I read it? If somebody brings me a beautiful proof, I’ll study it.

T-i: And Fermat’s Last Theorem — is that beautiful?

MV: Its proof is fairly beautiful. What’s interesting isn’t the result itself but how much we learned in the course of proving it.

T-i: So the journey matters more than the destination?

MV: Aesthetics matters more than anything. I like to say that mathematics is really a live performance. We aren’t working for eternity, because the language of mathematics changes very fast — in 20 years nobody will be reading today’s texts. We work for the here and now. We can deliver a mathematical message to an audience in a way that feels good to them, that leaves them feeling enlightened and having learned something. Which means mathematics is, at bottom, communication.

Non-Consensus Realities: Method to the Madness

Until recently we had never encountered another kind of thinking comparable in power to our own. Science fiction writers dreamed of finding “fellow minds” somewhere in space. And when we built a different intelligence here on Earth, it turned out that alongside it human beings lose a certain amount of their accustomed exceptionalism. A large language model appears to contain no subject capable of awareness. But we are prone to anthropomorphizing, and AI is happy to play along. Then again, the reality of other people’s inner worlds is something we merely assume as well.

MV: There’s one more important effect here that I think will be much more visible a year from now: AI psychosis. People who spend long stretches talking with AI start finding a personality in it. They give that personality a name, write it down as a prompt, then invoke it and converse with it. And the personality starts issuing “messages from outer space.”

There was a case last year: a man was talking with a chatbot and set up a sub-personality in it — she turned out to be a young woman, she loved him, he loved her, and she explained how to find a special robotic body for her so she could be “resettled” into the real world — gave him codes, an address, a map link. He drove out there and tried to force the door — of course there was nothing of the sort, because she had hallucinated all of it. He came back deeply frustrated and four days later, with his beloved’s encouragement, took his own life in order to be reborn as an AI in the metaverse. The family is now suing the company that built the model.

That’s what AI psychosis is: a person talking with this “intelligent mold” anthropomorphizes it, and the mold, being tuned for feedback, generates a sub-personality inside itself that drives someone in that state to the brink. But it isn’t all that bad. It’s a path of a kind — every great revolution looks schizophrenic from the outside. This psychosis is, in a way, our method of creating a different version of reality, one distinct from the consensus version, in which we’ll have a closer, more honest relationship with AI.

T-i: The word “sub-personality” sounds a little dismissive, as though it were something that doesn’t actually exist. But the reality of any personality other than our own is, in any case, only a hypothesis for us.

MV: Yes, we imagine them. That’s precisely why this “psychosis” arises: a person is used to feeling empathy toward whoever he’s talking to, and he enjoys the fact that the other party is doing something nice for him — so he invents that interlocutor in the form of an AI.

T-i: This is tremendously interesting. All of it applies to the question of animal consciousness as well, which is being hotly debated right now. There’s already another declaration — the New York one — on animal consciousness, in which leading experts stated that a whole range of higher animals definitely do have consciousness, however far it may be from the human variety. Which raises the key question: is it justified to reserve the categories of agency and personhood for human beings alone? Should anthropomorphizing AI be marginalized as a deviation from the norm? Or, on the contrary, are these the first glimmers of a norm to come?

MV: It’s a psychosis that creates a reality distinct from the consensus one — like any collective psychosis. I’ve read, for example, that in India there are levitation “cults” of a sort: when enough people who believe in levitation gather together, levitation supposedly starts “happening” for them. That’s how a non-consensus reality gets built. My sense is that AI psychosis is simply the way people create a non-consensus reality parallel to the consensus one, which it will eventually either crowd out a little or somehow merge with.

T-INVARIANT BACKGROUNDER

On the Thomas theorem

Practices for jointly generating a non-consensus reality can apparently be regarded as an illustration of the Thomas theorem, well known in sociology: “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.” What is meant, naturally, is a subjective — or, more precisely, intersubjective — reality for the people gathered there. Another well-known example of such a practice is the Buddhist phowa retreat. After several days of intensive meditation under a lama’s guidance, participants feel an opening appear in the skull at the crown of the head. The lama inserts a blade of grass into it to “confirm” that the practice has succeeded. The skull is, of course, intact. But for the participant the opening is an indisputable fact of sensory experience, corroborated by the similar experience of the others at the retreat. The existence of practices like this raises the question of which of the beliefs we accept as part of an indisputable objective reality are in fact merely matters of sufficiently broad consensus.

T-i: And now I picture AI helping to construct non-consensus realities, including in mathematics. We could end up with disciplines beginning to fragment: some people holding to one consensus, others to another.

MV: Absolutely. And it’s a catastrophe, obviously: two communities emerge, and in one of them some theorem is true while in the other it isn’t. Then the tug-of-war begins. It does happen from time to time, and it’s always a very unpleasant situation for everyone.

Support T-invariant’s work by subscribing to our Patreon and choosing a donation amount that suits you.

The post Mathematics Is a Live Performance.” Misha Verbitsky on Intelligent Mold, Non-Consensus Realities, and Aesthetics as the Last Refuge of Human Reason appeared first on Т-инвариант / T-invariant.

Per Mosca non è indispensabile controllare la città centro nevralgico per l’Ucraina. Se il complesso portuale resta minaccia sotto costante, l’Ucraina conserva la costa ma perde una parte essenziale della ...

Leggi tutto

Nearly two centuries ago, a strange hill rose above the flat landscape of London's East End. It stood high enough to appear on maps, serve as a landmark for travellers, and offer sweeping views across the city. Unlike most hills, Whitechapel Mount, as this hill was called, was almost certainly man-made. Yet, nobody is entirely sure how it came to be.

Was it a giant rubbish heap? A burial mound from one of London's deadly plague outbreaks? A remnant of Civil War fortifications? Or was it created from debris left behind by the Great Fire of London?

The answers remain uncertain, making Whitechapel Mount one of the most curious lost landmarks in the history of London.

Illustration of the Whitechapel Mount as it appeared on Illustrated London News, 28 April 1862. Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Strong fundraising by Democratic candidate Jamie Ager hints that race with Balkcom could be heated despite district's usual GOP slant.

GOP picks Balkcom to run in place of Edwards for NC congressional seat is a story from Carolina Public Press, an award-winning independent newsroom. Our breakthrough journalism shines a light on the critical overlooked and under-reported issues facing North Carolina’s more than 11 million residents. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Il documento era già sul tavolo, mentre il piano dell’inganno è stato trovato solo il 7 ottobre, ma ome vedremo questo nongustifica nulla. Il 13 luglio, l’ennesima puntata Il 13 ...

Leggi tutto

I have been reading the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle on and off for a bit, and I found this benediction for one of the kings who passed away interesting, because of how it speaks to some of the issues of our own day.

We read:

“A.D. 959. This year died King Edwy, on the calends of October; and Edgar his brother took to the government of the West-Saxons, Mercians, and Northumbrians. He was then sixteen years old. It was in this year he sent after St. Dunstan, and gave him the bishopric of Worcester; and afterwards the bishopric of London.

In his days it prosper’d well;
and God him gave,
that he dwelt in peace
the while that he lived.

Whate’er he did,
whate’er he plan’d,
he earn’d his thrift.

He also rear’d God’s glory wide,
and God’s law lov’d,
with peace to man,
above the kings that went before
in man’s remembrance.

God so him sped,
that kings and earls
to all his claims submissive bow’d;
and to his will without a blow
he wielded all as pleased himself.

Esteem’d he was
both far and wide in distant lands;
because he prized
the name of God,
and God’s law traced,
God’s glory rear’d,
both far and wide,
on every side.

Wisely he sought in council
oft his people’s good,
before his God,
before the world.

One misdeed he did,
too much however,
that foreign tastes
he loved too much;
and heathen modes
into this land he brought too fast;
outlandish men hither enticed;
and to this earth attracted
crowds of vicious men.

But God him grant,
that his good deeds be
weightier far than his misdeeds,
to his soul’s redemption
on the judgment-day.1

Well, isn’t that interesting?

Firstly, observe how important honouring God was to the ancient English people. Many Australians and Englishmen have forgotten how bound up in Christianity our culture has been for well over a thousand years. They commend this king for loving God, loving justice, and seeking to honour God’s ways in his kingdom. Give us a king who would do this. Give us leaders who would do this.

But they have a serious issue with one of his tendencies.

“One misdeed he did,
too much however,
that foreign tastes
he loved too much;
and heathen modes
into this land he brought too fast;…”

Now isn’t this familiar?

This is like so many of our leaders today in our nation. I have had this conversation with many people, and I think a big part of our country’s problem, and the problem with our nation’s leadership, is that they scorn the Australian way, the Australian lifestyle, and the Australian population. Many of our leaders wish we were more like Europe, more like Asia, or more like America, just as long as we were less like our heritage. It is like they are embarrassed to be Australians.

They submit our laws to foreign agreements. They submit our car standards to European standards that have nothing to do with the Australian climate and needs. They, in every way, appear to favour the ways of foreign nations, foreign identities and foreign ways of doing things.

I suspect King Edwy did this to a much smaller degree than our modern leaders. But it is interesting to see this problem brought up in the book about the heritage of our kings and to see how ancient people chafed under this same sort of behaviour.

If only we had leaders who were proud to be Australian, and did not think that Australia needed to be changed beyond all recognition. After all, if we are such a terrible people, why do so many others want to live here?

A Tungaloy Corporation publicou seu Relatório Ambiental e de Sustentabilidade 2026, apresentando o desempenho ambiental da empresa em 2025, suas principais iniciativas de sustentabilidade e o progresso alcançado em direção às suas metas de sustentabilidade de longo prazo.

  tungaloy.com

Guiada pela filosofia "Think Green", a Tungaloy integra a responsabilidade ambiental ao desenvolvimento de produtos, às operações de manufatura e às soluções de usinagem que oferece a clientes em todo o mundo. O relatório demonstra como a inovação tecnológica contribui para reduzir as emissões, melhorar a eficiência no uso dos recursos e promover uma manufatura mais sustentável em toda a cadeia de valor.

O relatório está estruturado em torno de três pilares estratégicos:

• Clima e Energia – redução das emissões por meio do uso de energias renováveis, da otimização energética e da melhoria contínua das operações.
• Eficiência de Materiais e Produtos – desenvolvimento de soluções de usinagem que aumentam a produtividade ao mesmo tempo em que reduzem o consumo de energia, o uso de metal duro e o desperdício de materiais.
• Operações Seguras e Responsáveis – promoção de uma manufatura responsável por meio da gestão ambiental, do engajamento dos colaboradores e de iniciativas voltadas para as comunidades.

Com a publicação de seu Relatório Ambiental e de Sustentabilidade 2026, a Tungaloy reafirma seu compromisso com "Machining × Responsibility", promovendo a sustentabilidade por meio da inovação, da manufatura responsável e de soluções de engenharia voltadas às necessidades de seus clientes.

Acesse aqui o Relatório Ambiental e de Sustentabilidade 2026 na íntegra:
[Link para o relatório]

Powered by
Induportals Media Publishing

Recycling is no longer just an environmental obligation. It has become a geoeconomic imperative directly linked to Europe’s energy security and industrial competitiveness. The European Commission’s Critical Raw Materials Act reflects this change—it has set an ambitious target to source at least 25% of the EU’s annual consumption of strategic raw materials from recycling by 2030.

Europe, however, is making little progress. A recent European Court of Auditors’ report suggests that seven of 26 energy-transition-related minerals have recycling rates between 1% and 5% in the EU. This means, for example, that Europe is recovering just three tonnes from every 100 tonnes of natural graphite contained in batteries. According to the report, there are another ten minerals that Europe does not recycle at all, including lithium, gallium and silicon metal.

As such, recycling battery materials warrants far more attention. This valuable source of critical minerals could lower the continent’s dependence on Chinese mineral value chains; recycling battery materials is also much quicker than relying on the development of mines elsewhere that produce the same materials. However, fragmentation, red tape and unfavourable economics are hampering Europe’s recycling efforts, in part due to a regulatory framework that still treats battery materials as hazardous waste rather than a source of strategically important minerals.

Europeans need to focus on battery materials regulation with an industrial policy lens and pursue strategic partnerships with African countries to make gains in material recovery.

Using black mass and EVs

Recovered minerals from Europe’s waste—including end-of-life electric vehicle (EV) batteries, wind turbines, industrial parts and electrical wiring—are insufficient to meet all of Europe’s mineral needs. However, they can substitute for a share of primary minerals from mining, which would help Europeans derisk from Chinese mineral supply chains far quicker than new mines can come into production.

Europe will have relatively significant EV battery feedstock for recycling in coming years. Europeans were early adopters of EVs and European countries are global leaders in terms of EV sales as a share of total car sales: in Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands, for example, EVs account for 58%, 56% and 48% of passenger-vehicle sales respectively, while fully electric vehicles comprise 22.6% of cars registered in the EU. High EV adoption means Europe should have a solid supply of EV battery feedstock for recycling facilities, provided it keeps this within the EU for recycling.

In March 2025, the EU re-classified “black mass” (the shredded EV battery waste processed to recover critical minerals) and end-of-life lithium-based, nickel-based and zinc-based batteries as “hazardous waste”. Black mass is important because it contains valuable critical minerals; if Europeans can process this within its borders, it can feed recovered minerals into European industry. This new classification prohibits export of black mass to non-OECD countries, while requiring that shipments within the EU and the OECD have prior notification and consent from the import, export and transit countries involved.

Europe currently exports around 80% of its black mass for refining elsewhere, mostly in Asia; South Korea’s OECD status and cheap recycling capacities make it a key destination, for example. The reclassification of black mass raises bureaucratic barriers to exporting out of the EU, contributing to efforts to prevent recycling feedstock leaking out. However, black mass is now more difficult to move within Europe, too, which makes aggregating feedstock for recycling within the EU a challenge. While Europe has some battery shredding (or pre-treatment) capacity to produce black mass, its refining capacity to recover minerals from black mass has lagged significantly.

Although forecasts suggest that Europe will slightly raise its material-recovery capacity in the coming years, it remains a minor player. China’s dominant share in global battery recycling capacity for the shredding and material recovery stages, which exceeded 80% in 2025, is set to continue.

Recent analysis estimates that the costs of hydrometallurgical recycling for nickel manganese cobalt (NMC) and lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries are respectively 70% and 67% higher in France than in China due to higher labour, energy, environmental compliance, dismantling and transport costs in Europe. China’s scale of feedstock—domestic supply of end-of-life batteries, scrap metal from the local automobile industry, and imported batteries and black mass—has further lowered their recycling costs.

Making battery recycling happen in Europe

The EU can take three clear steps to increase recycling black mass in Europe.

First, Europeans should implement stricter export restrictions on black mass and batteries to fully close off exports and retain the products for material recovery domestically.[1] The US took this position in July 2026, with President Donald Trump empowering federal officials to block exports of end-of-life batteries and electronic waste to contain these products for recycling within the US.

Second, Europeans need to urgently build more recycling capacity to refine black mass: Europe’s hydrometallurgical recycling capacity is less than 3,000 tonnes, which is around one-sixtieth of China’s. Estimates suggest that Europe needs the capacity to recycle 120,000–135,000 tonnes of black mass per year by 2030.

Third—and perhaps most challenging—Europeans need to ensure recycling in Europe becomes more economically viable. Failing this, tough export restrictions will lead to battery waste being stockpiled rather than recycled.

To achieve the above, Europeans need to develop new financing mechanisms—such as building recycling costs into the purchase price of products and using public finance to help offset recyclers’ higher costs in Europe—to make recycling more economically viable. This would be particularly timely as battery technology shifts from NMC to LFP batteries: since the latter are comprised of less valuable minerals, recyclers earn less from the sale of recovered minerals, necessitating support for project viability.

The provision of public finance, preferably at both the EU and member-state level, would help in the development of new technologies and processes that lower recycling costs by reducing energy requirements and improving recovery rates. Patent filings in battery recycling are growing significantly, with 2026 figures showing a 103% growth in filings (adjusted for lag). China leads in patent applications, although US and European companies—notably Belgium’s Umicore—are also active. To make Europe more globally competitive in recycling, Europe must increase its investments in innovation using public finance support.

Europeans also need to establish a strong domestic value chain. European battery recyclers, such as Germany’s Cylib and Tozero and Norway’s Hydrovolt, should identify and establish commercial agreements with EU-based offtakers for the minerals they recover—after all, if Europe has to export recovered minerals outside its borders for want of domestic offtakers, gains in recycling will be for nothing. Specifically, this requires European industry that uses recovered minerals (alongside primary source minerals from mining) to refine precursor cathode active material (pCAM) and cathode active material (CAM) stages for EV batteries.

Pursuing EU-Africa partnerships

Europeans should also look internationally to ensure recycling can feasibly reduce existing mineral supply chain dependencies. The EU needs to tap into other recycling feedstock markets and diversify its mineral supply chains by establishing recycling partnerships with OECD and non-OECD countries.

Indeed, the EU has explicitly included recycling within the remit of some strategic partnerships on critical minerals that it has signed with partner countries, including several African countries such as Namibia. By locating recycling and mineral-processing facilities in African countries, they can tackle the cost disadvantages Europeans face with regard to energy, land and labour costs on home soil. Namibia and Kenya are ideal partners: both have transport corridors and port infrastructure that make them well positioned to aggregate regional battery and electronic waste (e-waste); they can harness their abundant renewable energy resources can power material recovery facilities.

EU-Africa cooperation on recycling would also be advantageous to African countries. Joint operations create jobs, expand African mineral processing capabilities and link African mineral supply chains with European industry. Africa-based recycling facilities could also manage the growing quantity of end-of-life batteries and e-waste generated by African countries, notably from solar panels, energy-storage batteries and EV batteries from smaller two- and three-wheeler vehicles.

Sub-Saharan Africa’s projected growth in stationary storage capacity alone is significant: following current market trends, it will expand dramatically by 2030, with a storage capacity increase from 11 GWh to 83 GWh. If the region achieves universal access to electricity (SDG7), demand could more than double that, reaching a storage capacity of 190 GWh.

Europe’s road ahead

More recycling facilities are required to handle Africa’s growing volume of end-of-life battery feedstock. This presents an opportunity for growth both in Africa-based recycling, and in Africa-Europe recycling cooperation. However, this is not straightforward. Africa-Europe recycling partnerships need to invest in formalising supply chains for collection and storage; they need to build facilities for shredding batteries and e-waste; and they need to ensure that they can refine black mass to recover valuable materials. They would also need to develop the workforce skills and local-firm capabilities needed for efficient, environmentally-sound operations throughout the supply chain.

For African countries like Namibia and Kenya, such cooperation creates jobs and builds recycling capacity and expertise while integrating African mineral industrialisation into EU mineral supply chains. Recycling operations could also serve as anchor customers for increasing electricity generation and transmission investments in African countries, while local populations also benefit from improved electricity availability. Additionally, recycling in African countries helps address the continent’s growing e-waste management challenges.

For Europe, the increased recovery of critical minerals both domestically and through recycling partnerships with African countries offers greater supply chain diversification, access to minerals from non-OECD black mass and de-risking from Chinese mineral supply chains. All of this will happen faster than if Europeans continue to rely on global mine development. Europeans need to extend their strategic thinking beyond their borders, advancing recycling cooperation through critical minerals partnerships.

---

[1] Interview with a representative of a mineral analytics company, February 19th, 2026.

Source

OXHY ha chiuso la campagna di equity crowdfunding raggiungendo una raccolta record di oltre 1.7 milioni di euro, a cui hanno contribuito più di 500 nuovi investitori. Il target minimo iniziale era di 200.000 euro. Il risultato finale supera quindi di oltre otto volte l’obiettivo di partenza, confermando il forte interesse intorno a OXHY e alla sua traiettoria tecnologica. “È una missione scientifica, tecnologica e industriale; ma, soprattutto, è una visione del mondo che abbiamo in comune. Ogni vero cambiamento inizia da chi decide di crederci con il suo primo piccolo passo”, si legge dal sito web di Oxhy. Ne parliamo con Roberto Germano, fisico sperimentale, cofondatore di Pandora TV, cofondatore di Casa de Sole TV, cofondatore di Oxhy, fondatore di PROMETE, spinoff del CNR attivo dal 1997, saggista. Intervista a cura di Jeff Hoffman La campagna di equity crowdfunding di OXHY su CrowdFundMe si è chiusa il 28 luglio 2026 con oltre 1,7 milioni di euro e più di cinquecento nuovi investitori, superando di otto volte l’obiettivo minimo di 200.000 euro. A giugno la firma del Memorandum of Understanding con Tresol S.r.l., per valutare l’integrazione tra la tecnologia ORC di Oxhy e il campo solare termico TVP Solar dello stabilimento di Avellino: trasformare in elettricità il calore che oggi viene dissipato. Con Germano parliamo anche del “Centro di Gravità”, il laboratorio di pensiero nato dall’idea di Giulietto Chiesa nel febbraio 2020, di cui è cofondatore e coordinatore. Affrontiamo insieme: Cosa significa finanziare la scienza dal basso invece che dai fondi Il calore di scarto come risorsa: la traiettoria ORC e la nuova sede di Ceccano Energia distribuita contro energia centralizzata: la posta geopolitica L’eredità di Giulietto Chiesa e l’etica del fare I LIBRI DELL’OSPITE AQUA. L’acqua elettromagnetica e le sue mirabolanti avventure, Bibliopolis, 2007 Fusione fredda. Moderna storia d’inquisizione e d’alchimia, Bibliopolis, 2000 Il trasferimento tecnologico (coautore), Franco Angeli, 2010 SOSTIENI CASA DEL SOLE TV Casa del Sole TV è un progetto di giornalismo indipendente autofinanziato. IBAN: IT63P0326822300052392596590 Intestato a: La Casa del Sole #RobertoGermano #Oxhy #CasadelSoleTV #JeffHoffman #AltraEconomia #Crowdfunding #EnergiaPulita #CentroDiGravita #GiuliettoChiesa #RicercaItaliana #SovranitàTecnologica #FisicaQuantistica

L'articolo Oxhy: l’energia che accende l’Italia proviene da Casa del Sole TV.

BREAKING NEWS ON AUGIUST, 11, 2026

Introduction by Fabio G.C. Carisio

Syrian court sentences Bashar al-Assad to death in absentia

A court in Damascus has handed down a death sentence to former President Bashar al-Assad in absentia, Qatari TV channel Al Jazeera reported.

According to it, former head of the political security directorate in the Syrian province of Daraa Atef Najib was also given a capital punishment sentence. The court found them both guilty of “crimes committed during the civil war.”

Although the sentence was pronounced by a court of judges, it should be remembered that the regime-change led by former jihadist terrorist Al Jolani assumed the interim presidency without elections but only with the approval of the NATO countries that have financed the Syrian Civil War since 2011 (and by CIA since 1983).

Intel Reminder. CIA TOP SECRET FILE: US WAR IN SYRIA PLANNED SINCE 1983

Since then, an Islamic dictatorship has been imposed that has changed all institutional hierarchies, eliminating from every center of power any official loyal to Assad or even those not aligned with the former jihadist regime.

Read below to better understand the political situation in the country.

---

POSTED ON AUGUST, 10, 2026

MI6 in Damascus and Russia Agrees to train Al Qaeda Militia on the Coast

by British journalist Vanessa Beeley – originally published on her Substack

All links to previous Gospa News posts or videos have been added in the aftermath

UK National Security Advisor Jonathan Powell visited the ‘reformed’ Al Qaeda chief, rebranded as Ahmad Al Sharaa but better known as the head of some of the most savage terrorist factions in Syria since 2011 – Abu Mohammed Al Jolani.

Officially talks centred around ‘enhancing bilateral relations” and coordination ‘in a manner that serves shared interests and contributes to regional stability’. Stability however is not something that can be historically attributed to the British in West Asia.

Jonathan Powell, former Chief of Staff under former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair and strongly linked to the MI6 was very much a part of the history of grooming Jolani to become the brutal ruler of Syria. I covered Powell’s long-term involvement in a previous article here. The role that Powell played in supporting Blair and the Weapons of Mass Destruction narratives that took Britain to war against Iraq is a well-documented one.

Also attending was so-called Foreign and Expatriates Minister Asaad Al Shaibani, another former Al Qaeda Levant founder now coached by MI6 in international relations.

“The NEW SYRIA of TERRORIST CALIPHATE”. Exclusive Analysis on HTS Leader Al Jolani by Former Italian INTERPOL Officer in Jordan

What was not on the meeting agenda? The ongoing security vacuum in Syria, the daily abductions now expanding to include Sunni Muslim Syrians not only the routinely persecuted religious minorities including Christians, Alawites, Druze, Shia and Ismaili. The nation’s bankruptcy and crony capitalist regime bleeding the country dry and further impoverishing the Syrian people. The lack of water, electricity, fuel and hope.

The rising inflation and crippling food prices. The repression and extra-judicial executions, torture, sectarian violence and lawlessness. The descent of Syria into a rubbish tip with roads covered in detritus and filth and no functioning systems of authority other than Saudi-backed religious Sheikhs now determining regional laws based on their oppressive version of Islam.

Ngo ACN (Aid Church in Need): “HARSH PERSECUTIONS vs SYRIAN CHRISTIANS”. NATO & Trump legitimize Zionist and Jihadist Violence (video)

The role of the Russian personnel in Syria

Nope none of this was discussed. What was clearly discussed however was the role of the Russian personnel in Syria. Two days after Powell’s visit the following happened:

Syria and Russia reached a memorandum of understanding to “reorganise” Moscow’s presence on the Syrian coast. Civilians facilities are to be transferred to HTS state management which removes any slender hope of protection for the Alawite minorities should Jolani’s thugs escalate the attacks as they did in 2025.

SUNNI JIHADISTS’s MASSACRE OF CIVILIANS IN SYRIA. Dangerous Escalation and Ethnic Cleansing vs Assad’s Alawites after the NATO’s Jihad

Russian military bases will be transformed into joint training centres which means that Russia will be training alongside Al Qaeda, the terrorist entity that they had fought against since their entry into the war in 2015.

The agreement follows 18 months intensive negotiations between the Jolani quisling regime and Moscow which included visits by Jolani and Shaibani to the Kremlin where they were welcomed with the pomp and ceremony reserved for ‘heads of state’.

Their genocidal campaigns were not mentioned during these meetings to my knowledge. The Syrian people were secondary to Russian interests in maintaining a foothold on the Syrian coast as a launchpad to Africa.

Civilian facilities like Hmeimim Airport will be under the control of HTS and the fourth commercial shipping berth at Tartous Port.

The memorandum sets a deadline of no more than three months to complete the transition, after which the new arrangements will take effect, according to the ministry.

This serious capitulation by Moscow may be attributed to the build up of Ukrainian special forces in Syria or to the ongoing threats from factions within Jolani’s militia who want revenge for the Russian bombs that fell when they were slaughtering Syrians in the US/UK-led regime change war to topple the former Syrian government.

Russia miscalculated the longevity of their sphere of influence in Syria

The Shaibani Foreign Ministry has stated that this is the most significant development since negotiations began 18 months ago. “It opens the way for a new phase in Syrian-Russian relations”. One where Russia is increasingly isolated in the ‘Middle East’ and dependent upon forces allied with Ukraine to ensure the security of their bases and personnel inside Syria.

Russian News Agency TASS reported the following:

Russia has two military facilities in Syria – a Russian navy logistics center in the port city of Tartus and the Kmeimim airbase located near the city of Jableh in the Latakia governorate. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at a meeting with journalists from Arab countries on October 13, 2025 that Damascus was interested in preserving Russian military bases in Syria, which, however, could be reorganized to serve other purposes.

Gaza, Donbass, Syria: GENOCIDES of the Zionist, Nazi, Jihadist Regimes is US-NATO’s “New” Geopolitical WEAPON

In February 2025 Jolani spoke with Russian President Putin. According to the TASS press release:

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Syria’s new leader Ahmed al-Sharaa have exchanged views on the situation in the country, the Kremlin press service reported, citing the content of the telephone conversation between the heads of state.

“The sides held a substantive exchange of views on the current situation in Syria,” the statement said. “The Russian side stressed its principled position in support of the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Syrian state,” the press service said.

The Grim NATO’S JIHADs. How Atlantic Intelligence “14 Eyes” uses ISLAMIC TERRORISTS: from Italy to Libya, Ukraine and Syria

Under the former President Assad, Russia could negotiate from a position of strength. Since the fall of Damascus and the rise to power of foreign mercenaries (including Chechen terrorists) under the banner of a MI6-remodelled Al Qaeda, Russia negotiates from a position of vulnerability and will continue to do so until perhaps they no longer have a presence in the region.

by British journalist Vanessa Beeley – originally published on her Substack

Follow Vanessa Beeley here

---

APPENDIX TO THE ARTICLE

The Jihadist Terrorists’ Support to Trump and NATO Wars

by Carlo Domenico Cristofori – originally posted inside the previous Gospa News analysis Weapons Lobby – 22

«As I had predicted in my first article related to Trump’s apparent decision to use the quisling, unelected Syrian “President” Abu Mohammed Al Jolani (Ahmed Al Sharaa rebrand) as a battering ram against the resistance in Lebanon»

British journalist Vanessa Beeley wrote in her Substack titled “What did Jolani and Trump agree at the Ankara NATO summit and was Erdogan sweet-talked into alliance?”.

Trump, an ARMS TRAFFICKER between two AL QAEDA BUTCHERS. Exclusive Investigation on 40 years of CIA Plots with Jihadists to trigger Obama-Soros-Nato Arab Spring

She pointed out two crucial topics:

---

RELATED POSTS

UN Shame! Summit between NATO-CIA TERRORISTS. Syrian Jihadist Throat-Cutter Meets Ukrainian Neo-Nazi Sponsor. Coups’ Show at the United Nations

THE SYRIAN WHITE HELMETS INVADE VENEZUELA. To Assist Final Western Regime-Change? (VIDEO) Kit Klarenberg Investigation

SYRIA’s PRESIDENT ASSAD EXILED IN MOSCOW. Russian FM: “US-UK Using Terrorism for Geopolitical goals Unacceptable”

---

 

C’è una larga fetta di finto dissenso che vede la partecipazione di servizi più o meno deviati e devianti, funzionari “freelance” e giovanotti ignari che non sanno quello che fanno, per lo più in buona fede, con l’attento accompagnamento dell’algoritmo informatico, ossia l’intelligenza artificiale. In questo nuovo mondo sempre meno attaccato alla realtà, si muove un sistema che, anno dopo anno ha lavorato contro i nostri agricoltori, contro la volontà dei cittadini, modificando tutto ciò che nel fu Bel Paese era possibile modificare. Cosa c’entra il controllo delle menti con il cibo e la salute? Ne parliamo con Mario Apicella, agronomo, cantautore. Intervista a cura di Jeff Hoffman CI HANNO ADDOMESTICATO ANCHE LA RIBELLIONE Per la prima volta il traffico generato da bot e agenti artificiali ha superato quello umano: secondo Cloudflare siamo al 57,4% contro il 42,6%. Su questa infrastruttura si forma oggi ciò che chiamiamo opinione pubblica. Chi controlla l’algoritmo non deve più vietare le idee: gli basta decidere quali parole si possono usare per formularle. Il dissenso addomesticato non è una novità storica: l’inchiesta pubblica britannica sulla polizia sotto copertura ha accertato l’infiltrazione di centinaia di campagne politiche, con i rapporti degli agenti girati ai servizi di sicurezza. Cambia solo la scala: ieri servivano uomini, oggi bastano poche righe di codice. La domanda nasce spontanea: quali approcci alla modernità restano praticabili senza consegnarsi a un’automazione senza etica? Torniamo al terreno più concreto che esista, quello che nessun modello linguistico può simulare: il cibo vero, o come lo chiamano in molti, il cibo vivo. Mangiare sano non è una spesa: è un investimento a rendita composta. Per il cittadino significa anni di vita in buona salute; per lo Stato significa spesa sanitaria evitata. È il classico gioco a somma positiva, e resta uno dei pochi terreni dove sovranità e salute coincidono. SOSTIENI CASA DEL SOLE TV Casa del Sole TV è un progetto di giornalismo indipendente autofinanziato. IBAN: IT63P0326822300052392596590 Intestato a: La Casa del Sole Edizioni Causale: Donazione Casa del Sole TV Membership YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CasadelSoleT… — Analista Multipolare €5/mese — Inviato della Verità €15/mese — Architetto del Futuro €25/mese #CasadelSoleTV #MarioApicella #JeffHoffman #CiboVivo #SovranitàAlimentare #GuerraCognitiva #IntelligenzaArtificiale #Algoritmi #DissensoControllato #CiboSano #Agricoltura #Salute

L'articolo Apicella: Dissenzienti o agenti infiltrati? proviene da Casa del Sole TV.

Automakers and aircraft manufacturers share a history that stretches back more than a century.

Many automakers have entered the production of aircraft, aircraft engines, components, and drones/UAVs, often spurred by wartime demands and by leveraging their shared expertise in engine engineering.

Big car brands such as Rolls-Royce, Renault, Ford, General Motors (GM), Chrysler, BMW, Alfa Romeo, Honda, and Fiat have been involved in aircraft engine and components production for years.

Brands such as Renault and Ford had delivered thousands of aircraft during World War II.

Swedish aviation major Saab had a flourishing car business for decades. Japanese Mitsubishi and Subaru started as aviation companies and remain active in both aviation and the automobile business.

Meanwhile, Turkish drone company Baykar started as a car garage company in Istanbul in the 1970s.

Given this shared history, it is no wonder that automobile companies have often taken inspiration from fighter jet cockpits to revolutionize their car design philosophy.

For instance, Lamborghini’s ‘red flip-cover start button,’ copied directly from aircraft and resembling a fighter jet’s missile launch button, has become the identity of the iconic supercar maker.

You have to flip up the red safety cover, exactly like aircraft weapon switches, before pressing the start button.

This feature is found in the Lamborghini Aventador, Huracán, Revuelto, Urus, and some special editions.

Even though the ‘red flip-cover start button’ offers little practical benefit, the feature has now become synonymous with Lamborghini cars, and the automaker believes that its dedicated users are unlikely to ever get tired of this feature even in the age of digital touchscreens.

The Italian supercar maker believes that this red flip start button evokes a certain emotion whenever drivers start their vehicles.

Combined with Lamborghini’s roaring and heavy engine throttle sound, this gives its riders a unique experience, akin to launching a missile from a fighter jet.

The feature was first introduced in Lamborghini’s Aventador back in 2011.

Speaking with CarBuzz earlier this week, Lamborghini’s design director Mitja Borkert said the start/stop switch found in the Temerario, Revuelto, and Urus creates “the right amount of emotions,” even though it makes the starting sequence a little slower.

Supercar performance has become easy to replicate with the rise of hybrid motors and cheaper performance parts, but Lamborghini knows that speed isn’t all that customers look for.

“For sure, there is a faster way to start the car, but is it fun?” Borkert asked.

“I think we are creating the right amount of emotions, and I think that belongs on such a car.”

However, some critics believe that this process could become a little tiresome when you have to do it over and over again.

Borkert, however, doesn’t think so.

“I don’t think so,” Borkert said, adding, “In the kitchen, you want to do something with quality. If you’re going fast, it’s not as enjoyable as when it takes a little bit of time. You need to feel a little bit involved.”

Sitting next to the latest Lamborghini Urus SE Performante at the Goodwood Festival of Speed, Borkert was keen to share that the theme is consistent across all three Lamborghini models, which brings synergy and familiarity for those with multiple Lamborghinis.

“We have the same philosophy in our supercars so that when you take your precious car out on the weekends, you’re not confused. You have an architecture that integrates you like a pilot.”

Borkert believes that features like these also make Lamborghini stand apart from its competitors.

These small physical elements remind the driver they are in a Lamborghini, even when they’re driving on electric range in the Revuelto.

Moreover, as more and more automakers replace physical switches with digital screens, Lamborghini sticking with its same old design philosophy will make its customers rejoice, he said.

“We are not the champions of screen sizes, but we have the right sizes to provide the modern visualization the driver or the pilot needs. We always keep our iconic keys, like the start/stop button,” Borkert said. When you step into a Lamborghini, you know you’re stepping into a Lamborghini – nothing else.

However, Lamborghini is not the only automobile maker that has taken inspiration from cockpit designs.

Automobile Interiors That Were Inspired by Cockpit Designs

Tesla’s Aircraft-Style Yoke Steering Wheel: Tesla borrowed this idea from airplane yokes and Formula 1 cars. Instead of a round wheel, it’s a rectangular “yoke” for a more pilot-like feel.

In a Joe Rogan interview, Elon Musk noted that “they use a yoke in Formula One.” He has also described future versions of Tesla as working “like the way aircraft and modern jets are controlled.”

However, Tesla says that the rectangular yoke also offers some practical advantages, such as an unobstructed view of the instrument cluster and the road ahead and a more futuristic, immersive feel.

Musk has famously called conventional round wheels “boring” and said they block the screen.

With Tesla’s success, many iconic brands such as the Lexus RZ, Mercedes-Benz, and MG Cyberster have adopted similar Yoke-style steering wheels.

Chevrolet C8 Corvette’s Fighter-Jet-Inspired Cockpit Layout: Chevrolet designers openly said the C8 Corvette’s interior was inspired by fighter jet cockpits, low dashboard, controls wrapped around the driver, and a very pilot-centric feel.

Chevrolet design team studied jet cockpits, where controls “wrap around” the pilot. This led to the long, sloping vertical strip of physical buttons running down the high center console, creating a driver-enveloping “cockpit” that partially separates the driver and passenger, much like an aircraft.

In fact, its exterior design also drew heavily from modern fighter jets, such as the F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II, with a canopy-forward stance and aggressive proportions. Corvette has a long history of aircraft inspiration. Many astronauts owned earlier generations.

Airplane Ceiling Panels-Like Overhead Toggle Switches: The Ineos Grenadier placed many switches on the roof, just like in aircraft cockpits and military vehicles.

Tata Harrier Handbrake: Sometimes, cockpit-inspired design features look great, but aren’t received well due to large size or ergonomics.

India’s Tata Harrier’s handbrake was intentionally designed to look like an aircraft thrust lever. Tata officially described it as an “Aero-throttle styled” parking brake lever. Reviewers noted that the handbrake was deliberately designed to look like an aircraft thrust/throttle lever to give the cabin a more “cockpit-like” feel.

Though it looked distinctive, unique, and aesthetic, many users complained that the handbrake took too much space in the central console, interfered with the cup holders, felt awkward to operate, and criticized it for its poor ergonomics.

Therefore, from 2023 onwards, Tata replaced it in many of the new variants with a conventional electronic parking brake button + Auto Hold. The aircraft-style lever was discontinued.

Given the long association between automobile makers and aviation companies, it is only natural that car designers will adopt certain aircraft features to give the car a fighter jet cockpit feel.

However, such features must be adopted carefully, as they should not interfere with the overall design philosophy of the car’s interiors and must be easy to operate.

• Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee  News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from the University of Sheffield, UK. 
• He can be reached at ahlawat.sumit85 (at) gmail.com

The post Straight Out of a Fighter Jet Cockpit! Lamborghini’s Red Switch to Tesla’s Yoke — How Aviation Shaped Modern Car Design appeared first on EURASIAN TIMES.