Hi NodeBB team,

I have NodeBB running locally on my machine:

NodeBB version: v3.12.7

Environment: Local development

Frontend: React (Vite) running on http://localhost:5173

Backend (NodeBB) running on http://localhost:4567

I’m trying to create a user via the API:

async function registerUser() {
  try {
    const res = await fetch(`${import.meta.env.VITE_API_URL}v3/users`, {
      method: "POST",
      headers: {
        "Content-Type": "application/json",
        "Authorization": `Bearer ${import.meta.env.VITE_TOKEN}`
      },
      body: JSON.stringify(formData),
    });

    if (!res.ok) {
      throw new Error(`HTTP error! Status: ${res.status}`);
    }

    const data = await res.json();
    console.log("User registered successfully:", data);
  } catch (error) {
    console.error("Error registering user:", error);
  }
}

How is it possible for a BBC reporter to have made the following obscene observation in his segment on Israel’s murder at the weekend of Al-Jazeera journalist Anas al-Sharif: "There's the question of proportionality. Is it justified to kill five journalists when you were only targeting one?"

Unpacking the depraved journalistic assumptions behind this short “question” is no small task.

Imagine that Israel finally allows western journalists into Gaza after blocking their entry for nearly two years. A team of five familiar BBC faces covering the region set up shop in Gaza and work out of an improvised studio inside the enclave.

Then news breaks that that their studio has been hit by an Israeli strike, and all five killed: Jeremy Bowen, Lyse Doucet, Yollande Knell, Lucy Williamson and Jon Donnison.

Israel doesn’t claim the strike was a mistake, but celebrates the killings. It says it has secret evidence that one of them – let’s say Jon Donnison, who made the observation above – was secretly recruited by Hamas’ military wing while in the enclave.

Can we imagine the BBC or any other western news organisation framing the segment in the following terms: "There's the question of proportionality. Is it justified to kill five journalists when you were only targeting one?"

The BBC helped kill Anas al-Sharif. Its reporting will kill more journalists

The media are legitimising the murder of journalists by Israel – and they are doing it because they are racist propagandists for a system of western colonial control in the Middle East

^{Jonathan Cook}

How is it possible for a BBC reporter to have made the following obscene observation in his segment on Israel’s murder at the weekend of Al-Jazeera journalist Anas al-Sharif: "There's the question of proportionality. Is it justified to kill five journalists when you were only targeting one?"

Unpacking the depraved journalistic assumptions behind this short “question” is no small task.

Imagine that Israel finally allows western journalists into Gaza after blocking their entry for nearly two years. A team of five familiar BBC faces covering the region set up shop in Gaza and work out of an improvised studio inside the enclave.

Then news breaks that that their studio has been hit by an Israeli strike, and all five killed: Jeremy Bowen, Lyse Doucet, Yollande Knell, Lucy Williamson and Jon Donnison.

Israel doesn’t claim the strike was a mistake, but celebrates the killings. It says it has secret evidence that one of them – let’s say Jon Donnison, who made the observation above – was secretly recruited by Hamas’ military wing while in the enclave.

Can we imagine the BBC or any other western news organisation framing the segment in the following terms: "There's the question of proportionality. Is it justified to kill five journalists when you were only targeting one?"

The BBC helped kill Anas al-Sharif. Its reporting will kill more journalists

The media are legitimising the murder of journalists by Israel – and they are doing it because they are racist propagandists for a system of western colonial control in the Middle East

^{Jonathan Cook}

Full Report.

In an AI gold rush, those selling the proverbial pickaxes are surest to win: cloud companies provide scalable managed computational resources as a subscription service now used by most businesses to store their data, and as a primary ingredient to build and use AI. Just three companies—Amazon, Microsoft, and Google—control two thirds of global cloud compute market share, collectively comprising “Big Cloud.” This highly concentrated market raises concerns regarding digital sovereignty, slowed innovation, and a concentration of corporate power.

In this report, we explore an underrecognized manner in which AI ecosystems increasingly depend on Big Cloud: Big Cloud’s investment in other companies. We show how Big Cloud companies are prolific investors widely deploying hundreds of billions of dollars over thousands of deals, often in smaller, lesser-known startups. We find that:
1. While some regulators have begun to scrutinize the largest of these deals—such as Microsoft’s investment in OpenAI or Google and Amazon in Anthropic—the ecosystem-wide scale of this investment is hard to overstate: Big Cloud invests as frequently and at similar amounts to the largest venture capital firms and startup accelerators. Further, Big Cloud invests about ten times as often as other Big Tech companies, and ten to a hundred times more in total dollar amounts.
2. Via accelerator programs, Big Cloud companies lock startups into their cloud infrastructure. Big Cloud ensnares young startups in their cloud ecosystem via cloud credits while requiring startups use the Cloud company’s other tech, and incentivizing strategies with particularly heavy cloud needs, such as generative AI.
3. More so than when other Big Tech companies or VC firms invest, startups funded by Big Cloud are more likely to rely on Big Cloud as their lead or sole investor. These relationships allow Big Cloud to exercise significant influence over startups and bend them to their interests.
4. Amid concerns that vertical integration may give one firm too much control over AI supply chains—such as chips, cloud, or data—our work shows that Big Cloud is investing in a way that brings many of the same risks as conventional forms of vertical integration: when Big Cloud invests in an AI supply chain company—such as a Data, X-as-a-Service, or Internet infrastructure company—that company is often more likely to be dependent on that Big Cloud company as their sole or lead investor, compared with other investors.
5. Intensifying concerns about threats to global digital sovereignty, we find that American Big Cloud companies make global investments at a far greater pace than other investors we compare against. Just over half of all Big Cloud investments are made internationally, about twice the frequency of large VCs, top accelerators and other Big Tech companies. Big Cloud also invests through accelerators abroad much more often than at home, highlighting the need for global regulatory scrutiny of startup accelerator programs.

While these practices merit creative regulatory and policy responses, we emphasize that such interventions should proceed in light of the following overarching implications:
— Dependence on Big Cloud is not just technical or contractual. It is also financial, as a source of investment. This compounds the need for structural separation: Amazon, Google, and Microsoft must be compelled to split their cloud business from their other businesses that run on the cloud, per past calls, so that they do not both provide infrastructure and compete with the customers and investees relying on that infrastructure.

— Big Cloud companies are huge investors, which sets them apart from all other large tech companies. Any one of these investments may be small and insignificant, but they cumulatively shape the startup and developer ecosystem in Big Cloud companies’ interest. Thus, in addition to “deal by deal” scrutiny, in which only the largest deals receive attention, regulators and researchers should monitor and scrutinize these investments and their effects in an ecosystem-wide, cumulative, and ongoing manner.

South Korean researchers have achieved a major milestone in space manufacturing by successfully testing the world's first 3D-printed titanium fuel tank to pass extreme cryogenic pressure conditions, marking a breakthrough that could transform how spacecraft components are produced.

The 640mm diameter tank, manufactured using Ti64 titanium alloy through Directed Energy Deposition (DED) 3D printing, withstood pressures of 330 bar while cooled to -196°C with liquid nitrogen during testing at the Korea Aerospace Research Institute (KARI). The pressure test exposed the tank to forces 165 times greater than standard tire pressure, demonstrating its reliability under the extreme conditions of space missions.

3D printing tackles titanium to create rocket parts

The technology offers a flexible alternative to traditional forging for the 'New Space' industry.

^{Annie Colbert (Popular Science)}

cross-posted from: lemmy.ml/post/34329663

cross-posted from: lemmy.ml/post/34329656

Julia Conley
Aug 07, 2025

Secretary of Veterans Affairs Doug Collins notified the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and several other unions that he was implementing an executive order signed by President Donald Trump, which required the termination of collective bargaining agreements for agencies whose missions are related to national security.

Peter Link

2025-08-08 01:53:54

'Blatant Attempt to Bust Our Unions': Trump Admin Moves to Gut Labor Protections at VA | Common Dreams

cross-posted from: lemmy.ml/post/34329656

Julia Conley
Aug 07, 2025

Secretary of Veterans Affairs Doug Collins notified the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) and several other unions that he was implementing an executive order signed by President Donald Trump, which required the termination of collective bargaining agreements for agencies whose missions are related to national security.

'Blatant Attempt to Bust Our Unions': Trump Admin Moves to Gut Labor Protections at VA

"This administration wants to break the spirit of working people in this country, but we will not be broken," said National Nurses United.

^{julia-conley (Common Dreams)}