Wednesday, October 22, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

American Oklo invests in Swedish Blykalla – forms nuclear power alliance

Published 30 September 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Blykalla develops next-generation nuclear reactors that automatically shut down when problems occur – now beginning collaboration with the USA.
2 minute read

American nuclear power company Oklo and Swedish company Blykalla are entering into a strategic partnership to accelerate the development of next-generation nuclear reactors.

Oklo is investing approximately $5 million to become one of the main investors as Blykalla raises new capital.

The collaboration between publicly listed Oklo (NYSE:OKLO) and Blykalla is one of the first transatlantic partnerships within the advanced nuclear reactor sector. The companies will share technology, coordinate supplier procurement, and exchange regulatory knowledge between the US and Sweden.

— By collaborating on suppliers, material data, and licensing processes, we can shorten time to deployment and continue focusing on delivering reliable, clean electricity to customers, comments Oklo’s CEO Jacob DeWitte.

Blykalla develops a compact lead-cooled reactor called SEALER, with a capacity of 55 megawatts – sufficient to supply electricity to a medium-sized Swedish city. The reactor builds on over 25 years of research and is designed to automatically shut down in case of problems, without requiring human intervention.

Oklo develops sodium-cooled reactors with a capacity of up to 75 megawatts. The company targets the American market and aims to deliver electricity to industries, the defense sector, and data centers.

Both companies’ reactors are significantly smaller than traditional nuclear power plants and represent a new generation of nuclear power with passive safety systems that do not require human intervention.

Growing electricity demand drives development

— Oklo and Blykalla share the same practical view on how to bring this new technology to market. By purchasing components together and conducting joint research, we can save both time and money, says Blykalla’s CEO Jacob Stedman.

Through the agreement, the companies will share knowledge about materials and components and make joint purchases from suppliers to reduce prices and shorten delivery times. Oklo may also directly supply certain components to Blykalla.

The partnership comes as society’s electricity demand is growing rapidly. AI development and new data centers require large amounts of electricity while the automotive industry invests in electric vehicles and factories transition from fossil fuels to electricity.

Oklo has previously signed agreements with industrial companies Siemens, Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power, Liberty Energy, and ABB for delivery of turbines, control systems, and electrical connections.

Blykalla is a Swedish company that develops small nuclear reactors for industries. Their SEALER reactor has an output of 55 megawatts and is cooled with lead instead of water. The technology is based on 25 years of research and is considered by international assessors to be the most advanced in Europe when it comes to new reactor types.

The company collaborates with major industrial companies such as German energy company Uniper, Swedish-Swiss engineering group ABB, and German pump manufacturer KSB. The goal is to deliver Europe's first modern small modular reactor to provide electricity to data centers, AI development, and industries.

Oklo is an American publicly traded company that develops reactors cooled with liquid sodium. The reactors can provide up to 75 megawatts and is the first in the US to have received site permits from authorities. Oklo has also submitted the first application to build and operate a new type of reactor in the United States.

The company also works with technology that can recycle old nuclear fuel and convert nuclear waste into new energy. Their customers include industry, data centers, and the US Department of Defense.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Over half a billion Chinese users embrace generative AI

The future of AI

Published today 11:03
– By Editorial Staff
AI services are used for intelligent search, content creation, as productivity tools, and in smart hardware.
1 minute read

The number of users of generative artificial intelligence in China has increased sharply during the first half of 2025. In June, 515 million Chinese people had access to AI services – an increase of 266 million in six months, according to official Chinese figures.

The data comes from a report presented on Saturday by the China Internet Network Information Center. It notes that domestically developed AI models have become popular among users.

A survey included in the report shows that over 90 percent of users say they prefer Chinese AI models.

Generative AI is being used in areas such as intelligent search, content creation, productivity tools and smart hardware. The technology is also being tested in agriculture, manufacturing and research.

The majority of users are young and middle-aged with higher education. Among users, 74.6 percent are under 40 years old, while 37.5 percent hold college, bachelor’s or higher degrees.

The report claims that China has become increasingly important in the global AI field. As of April, the country had filed approximately 1.58 million AI-related patent applications, representing 38.58 percent of the global total – the most in the world.

OpenAI launches AI-powered browser – challenges Google with ChatGPT Atlas

The future of AI

Published yesterday 22:48
– By Editorial Staff
Users should be aware that ChatGPT stores all conversation data that you send to the service.
2 minute read

OpenAI on Tuesday unveiled its new AI-based browser ChatGPT Atlas, a significant step in the company’s ambition to compete with Google as the primary source for information searches on the internet. The service, initially rolling out for macOS with support for Windows, iOS and Android coming soon, will be available to all users from the start.

Browsers have quickly become the next major battleground in the AI industry. Despite Google Chrome’s long-standing market dominance, a transformative shift is now underway as AI chatbots and intelligent agents change how people work online. Several startup companies have already launched their own AI-powered browsers, including Perplexity’s Comet and The Browser Company’s Dia. Google and Microsoft have also updated Chrome and Edge respectively with AI features.

OpenAI’s chief technology officer for Atlas, Ben Goodger, emphasized in a livestream on Tuesday that ChatGPT forms the core of the company’s first browser. Users can in ChatGPT Atlas engage in dialogue with their search results, similar to the functionality in Perplexity or Google’s AI mode, writes TechCrunch.

Side panel and web history

The most prominent feature in AI-based browsers has been the built-in chatbot in a side panel that automatically receives context from what is displayed on screen. This eliminates the need to manually copy and paste text or drag files to ChatGPT. OpenAI’s product manager Adam Fry confirmed that ChatGPT Atlas also includes this feature.

Additionally, ChatGPT Atlas has a “web history,” which means ChatGPT can now log which websites the user visits and what is done on them, then use the information for more personalized responses.

AI-based browsers also contain agents designed to automate web-based tasks. In TechCrunch’s tests, early versions of these agents prove to work well for simple tasks, but they struggle to handle more complex problems reliably.

Warning: OpenAI stores user data

Users should be aware that ChatGPT stores all conversation data. According to OpenAI’s official data storage guidelines, deleted conversations are saved for up to 30 days in the company’s system, unless legal obligations require longer storage. This applies even when users actively delete their chats.

Furthermore, OpenAI uses conversations to improve its services. Following a court ruling from the New York Times, OpenAI is now forced to permanently save all chats for non-business customers, meaning data is no longer deleted at all for many users.

Chinese Apple users file complaint against company for monopoly practices

Published yesterday 16:31
– By Editorial Staff
Pedestrians at the Apple store on Wangfujing shopping street in Beijing, China.
1 minute read

A group of 55 Chinese iPhone and iPad users has filed a complaint against Apple with the country’s market regulator. They accuse the tech giant of abusing its dominant position by forcing users onto the company’s own platforms for downloads and payments – while charging commissions of up to 30 percent.

The complaint to the Chinese competition authority was filed on Monday and comes as the trade conflict between Beijing and Washington intensifies. Both countries are using tariffs and technology restrictions as political tools, reports Reuters.

The group, represented by lawyer Wang Qiongfei, argues that Apple holds a monopoly on iOS app distribution in China. Meanwhile, the company allows alternative payment methods and app stores in other markets following pressure from the EU and the United States.

Forced to use Apple’s system

The complaint identifies three violations of China’s anti-monopoly law: Apple forces consumers to purchase digital content through the company’s own payment system, restricts app downloads to the App Store, and charges commissions of up to 30 percent.

Apple has not commented on the allegations.

This is the second time Wang Qiongfei has pursued a similar case. A lawsuit from 2021 was dismissed by a Shanghai court last year, but the ruling has been appealed to the Supreme People’s Court, where a final decision has not yet been reached.

Wang tells Reuters that he expects faster processing of this regulatory complaint compared to the previous civil lawsuit.

China has recently initiated several antitrust reviews against American tech companies, including chipmaker Qualcomm.

5 ways that the Patriot Act destroyed financial privacy

Published 18 October 2025
– By Naomi Brockwell
6 minute read

This week I was asked to give a presentation in DC about the history of financial surveillance. Now, most people know that the Patriot Act did tremendous damage to privacy in general. But fewer people understand the extent of damage that it did to financial privacy in particular.

Basically, the Patriot Act was the Bank Secrecy Act on steroids.

In this newsletter I want to look at Title III of the Patriot Act: The International Money Laundering Abatement and Financial Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001, and 5 ways that the Patriot Act destroyed financial privacy.

This was a moment in time that radically expanded financial surveillance under what we were told was a temporary measure, but it ended up lasting forever.

1. KYC

The Patriot Act standardized and mandated “Know Your Customer” (KYC) rules across all financial institutions.

Before 2001, “KYC” existed in principle but was largely determined by banks. Institutions determined their own risk tolerance, and what customer information they would collect. A community bank might rely on non-documentary checks and longstanding relationships, while a larger bank might collect more documents.

For example, if Betty wanted to open a bank account and you’ve known her since she was 5, and you knew her parents for 20 years and they’ve held an account with you for years, you might already have a pretty good understanding of the risk level of that potential customer. As a business, you would determine what you needed from them in order to let them open an account.

The Patriot Act introduced minimum ID standards. It enforced a Customer Identification Program (CIP) for every bank, broker‑dealers, mutual funds, and other similar institute in the US. These entities had to collect and verify government-issued IDs for every customer. They also had to cross-check identities against government watchlists.

This is when privacy in banking effectively ended and financial anonymity became illegal. “Risk-based KYC” went from a business choice to a legal requirement.

2. Expanded definitions

The Patriot Act broadened the definition of a “money transmitter”: Before 2001 it was just “a licensed sender of money”. After the change it covered any person engaged as a business in transmitting funds, including informal money transfer systems. That was a big expansion.

The Patriot Act also imposed an AML‑program mandate across financial institutions, extending coverage for different sectors.

This massively widened the surveillance reach, pulling basically every financial touchpoint into a federal dragnet.

3. Data sharing

The Patriot Act allowed unprecedented data sharing across agencies and borders.

Sections 351 and 358 broke down specific information-sharing barriers between the FBI, CIA, NSA, FinCEN, and foreign governments.

For example, SARs (Suspicious Activity Reports) were formalized under the 1992 Annunzio-Wylie Anti–Money Laundering Act to strengthened reporting rules. Banks became required to file reports against ANYTHING they deemed suspicious about how someone was using their own money. SARs were originally confined to Treasury oversight, and could be shared with law enforcement. But the Patriot Act expanded this access so that now these could be shared freely with intelligence agencies.

Under the Annunzio-Wylie Anti–Money Laundering Act it was already illegal for banks to tell customers when a suspicious activity report was filed. But with the Patriot Act came extended “safe harbor” provisions, where banks were encouraged to proactively share customer data with intelligence, without fear of being sued by the customer because they would have legal immunity.

It covered liability under “any contract or other legally enforceable agreement”, So if you had a contract with your bank that they’d keep your information private? The government said the bank now had immunity if they shared that information and broke the contract.

(Just to put this into context: The 4th amendment is mean to stop the government getting your information without a warrant. So instead, the government mandated that banks collect that information, and then granted the banks legal immunity for sharing that information with the government. An egregious overstep of what was meant to be a constitutional protection, if ever I’ve seen one.)

Additionally Section 314(b) created a safe harbor financial institutions to share customer and activity information with other financial institutions, when they in good faith suspect money laundering or terrorist financing.

So the net result of these safe harbor rules was that banks were both REQUIRED to report SARs and other information to the government, and they were legally shielded from aggressively and proactively doing so, and were also allowed to exchange intelligence with other banks. It basically fueled the private-sector surveillance grid that we have today, and deputized the financial system as investigatory agents in it.

Mass data pipelines from private banks to the surveillance state were legalized overnight.

4. Foreign surveillance

The Patriot Act authorized surveillance of correspondent and foreign accounts.

A “correspondent account” is a US bank account opened by a foreign bank so that foreign customers can move dollars, clear wires, and access the US financial system.

Think of it as the on-ramp to the dollar network for non-US banks.

The Patriot Act forced US banks to perform “enhanced due diligence” on all correspondent accounts held for foreign banks. It made dollar-clearing a surveillance chokepoint: any transaction touching the US financial system was now subject to monitoring.

It also added extraterritorial subpoena and forfeiture reach. If a foreign bank uses a US correspondent account, US authorities can subpoena records held abroad related to that account, and can freeze or take money sitting in that US account to enforce a seizure. This extended American surveillance standards globally, and made access to dollars conditional on cooperation. It also allowed for the override of local confidentiality or privacy rules. The result is a chilling effect: many foreign banks simply close accounts for whole customer groups or regions to avoid US penalties, even when those customers are legal where they live.

5. Bank/Intelligence marriage

The Patriot Act hard-wired banks into intelligence investigations, and made the relationship permanent. For example, it introduce something called government “broadcast lookups”. This is where FinCEN can blast a query to thousands of financial institutions (like “do you have anything on X person/entity?” or “do you have anything matching these patterns?”) and banks must search their records quickly and report back.

It shifted the relationship from requiring passive reporting from banks to creating on-demand, system-wide queries, where banks have been deputized as active responders and participants.

Under the Patriot Act, FinCEN’s mission was also codified as financial intelligence. Congress tied it explicitly to collecting, analyzing, and disseminating financial data in support of law-enforcement and intelligence, giving the FinCEN a permanent mandate and making it a statutory intel hub.

The new normal

The Patriot Act took a crisis, used the opportunity to create a mass surveillance program in the financial sector, and then rewrote the rules for how money is allowed to move, who gets to participate, and what the government can see. Then it quietly froze those rules in place until most people forgot there had ever been another way.

But we don’t have to accept this new normal, where every customer is now treated like a suspect, or where you have to beg for permission to access your own money and hope that the person holding on to it doesn’t instead file a secret report about you.

The financial sector was conscripted into the surveillance regime because it provided a loophole to avoid Fourth-Amendment protections. We should instead insist on real warrants, not outsource surveillance to private companies.

But if we can’t roll back what has become an ingrained surveillance overreach that we all take for granted these days, at least there are now decentralized payment systems that don’t opt in to traditional financial rails at all. These give people back human dignity, instead of egregious violation of their financial privacy.

I think that we also need to tell a better story about risk, because endless de-risking has become a license for collective punishment that shuts people out of the financial system entirely. Of course we don’t want to protect criminals – this is about restoring traditional check and balances, as well as basic civic norms, that used to be obvious: you should be able to use your own money without being tracked, profiled, and stored forever in a government database.

 

Yours in privacy,
Naomi

Naomi Brockwell is a privacy advocacy and professional speaker, MC, interviewer, producer, podcaster, specialising in blockchain, cryptocurrency and economics. She runs the NBTV channel on Rumble.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.