Explanation: What is so micro about tonight’s blue micromoon? Just after sunset, a full moon will appear slightly smaller and dimmer than usual. The reason is that the Moon’s fully illuminated phase occurs within a short time of apogee – when the Moon is farthest from the Earth in its elliptical orbit. In fact, tonight’s micromoon will be the farthest, smallest, and dimmest Moon this year. But tonight’s micromoon is notable for yet another reason: it is also a blue moon, meaning that it is the second full moon in the same month (moon-th). Pictured here, a supermoon — when the full moon appears near its largest — is compared to a micromoon as photographed from Kolkata, India in May and December of 2021. Although the next micromoon occurs next month, and the next blue moon at the end of 2028, the next blue micromoon will not occur until 2053.
(And in case you got an unwanted earworm from the title, maybe try this lively one, instead! – Ali)
Environmental activist Erin Brockovich is appealing to the public for help after launching a website to report data center concerns as the rapid expansion of AI-driven facilities across the United States increasingly clashes with local communities.
The appeal threatens to thrust an iconic anti-corporate activist into the heart of the battle to expand AI infrastructure at a time of growing public skepticism about the technology’s impact on jobs, safety and the environment.
The website, brockovichdatacenter.com, lists several “key concerns” surrounding such data centers, including high energy consumption that drives environmental impacts and costs, substantial water use for cooling that can strain local supplies, increased e‑waste from frequent hardware upgrades, exposure to location risks such as natural disasters or geopolitical instability, growing scalability pressures that can outpace local infrastructure, and constant noise from cooling systems and generators that can disrupt nearby communities.
“These challenges highlight the need for sustainable, secure, and efficient AI data center practices,” the website says. “Self-reporting is the best way we can get this information out to the public!”
A map on brockovichdatacenter.com shows major AI data centers in the U.S. that are either operational or under construction, overlaid with locations w…Read More | brockovichdatacenter.com
There are now more than 4,200 data centers—built to train, deploy and deliver AI—across the U.S., according to Data Center Map.
According to the website’s statistics, more than 2,716 reports have been submitted, with the most in Texas (612), as of Monday. The state is home to more than 460 data centers, according to Data Center Map.
The greatest concern among communities was water, followed by electricity, health and wildlife.
“The race to build AI infrastructures is unfolding town by town across America. In some places, data centers are welcomed. In others, they are delayed, contested or abandoned altogether. This map captures the real-world footprint of that race—revealing patterns of growth, conflict and uncertainty,” Brockovich said.
Virginia Long a hub for government contractors and cloud infrastructure, Virginia—particularly Northern Virginia’s “Data Center Alley”—offers proximity to federal agencies and one of the world’s densest fiber networks. Established infrastructure reduces build times and attracts hyperscalers looking to scale quickly.
Texas Texas combines vast, inexpensive land with a deregulated energy market that gives companies flexibility in securing large power loads. Cities like Dallas and Austin also bring a growing tech workforce and business-friendly policies that appeal to major AI investors.
Ohio Ohio has positioned itself as a Midwestern data hub, with strong incentives and central geographic access to U.S. population centers. Its legacy industrial sites are often repurposed for data centers, offering space and existing infrastructure at competitive costs.
Arizona Arizona’s dry climate is favorable for certain cooling technologies, while its abundant land and aggressive economic development incentives have drawn major tech firms. Phoenix, in particular, has become a key destination for new AI and cloud infrastructure builds.
Georgia Georgia, anchored by Atlanta, offers strong connectivity as a Southeast internet exchange hub. State and local tax breaks, combined with access to both talent and transport infrastructure, have made it increasingly attractive for large-scale data operations.
Utah Utah benefits from lower real estate costs, a stable regulatory environment, and access to renewable energy sources. Its growing tech sector, known as “Silicon Slopes,” provides an emerging talent pool to support AI-focused expansion.
Why companies are choosing these states:
Cheap land: Large-scale AI data centers require vast footprints; these states offer space at significantly lower costs than coastal markets.
Power access: Reliable, high-capacity energy grids, often with options for renewable sourcing, are critical for AI workloads.
Tax breaks: State and local governments are competing aggressively with incentives to attract long-term infrastructure investment.
Fewer regulations: Streamlined permitting and business-friendly policies enable shorter development timelines and reduced compliance burdens.
A whopping 68% of Americans say they worry about surveillance pricing increasing the cost of goods, while just 5% believe it will lead to lower prices, according to a new survey from GBAO Strategies distributed by the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. Twenty percent say it will likely just keep prices the same.
The new survey is part of the UFCW’s “Affordable Groceries and Good Jobs Campaign,” an effort to encourage states to pass laws banning surveillance pricing and electronic shelf labels (ESLs), the increasingly common price tags that some activists worry allow companies to rapidly change prices in stores several times per day.
The concern includes obvious dynamic pricing models, like increasing the cost of cold beverages when it gets hot outside, but also involves more sophisticated and as-yet theoretical examples like increasing the cost of food staples when a customer’s data is analyzed in store and it’s determined they’re willing to pay more.
Fifty-eight percent of Americans in the survey say digital price tags would make them less likely to shop in a store, with 35% saying it would make no difference, and 3% saying it would make them more likely to shop there. Sixty-seven percent are in favor of banning ESLs outright, according to the new survey.
Walmart, which has patented AI-powered price changes, has been rolling out electronic shelf labels across its stores, and it aims to feature them in every U.S. location by the end of 2026. But the company has insisted it’s not going to use ESLs for jacking up prices and insists that a human manager must be in the loop when prices change.
Unsurprisingly, 66% of those surveyed say they’re worried about the cost of groceries. And it’s no wonder, given the trajectory of inflation in recent months. The University of Michigan’s May sentiment index hit a record low last month at 44.8, down five points from April, according to Bloomberg.
In April, inflation rose 3.8% on an annualized basis, while wages rose just 3.6%, the first time wages have failed to keep up with inflation since 2023, according to CBS News. And that’s causing major concerns about supermarkets’ plans to squeeze customers for more money with new tech.
The new survey takers at GBAO Strategies noted that some grocery stores are replacing paper price tags with digital price tags and asked Americans whether that technology was likely to increase or decrease prices for consumers. Just 3% thought it would decrease prices, while 65% thought stores would use digital price tags to increase prices. 24 percent of participants believe it will keep prices about the same, with the remainder (8%) saying they don’t know.
UFCW International Vice President Ademola Oyefeso told Gizmodo that he believes electronic shelf labels are a tool for price gouging and that tech companies are marketing them for that purpose.
“The ESL industry sells the prospect of higher prices and job losses as positives,” said Oyefeso. “Across the country, families are having to make tough choices in the grocery aisle every day as a result of sky-high prices, and polling clearly shows that they want these predatory technologies banned.”
Proponents of digital shelf labels take issue with the idea of using the term surveillance pricing at all. They prefer terms like “personalized pricing” and believe that stores have an incentive to make pricing competitive. But unions like UFCW don’t believe that’s true and are urging legislation to be passed around the country to fight it.
“Federal and state lawmakers know these practices are wrong, and the UFCW urges them to get ahead of them before they appear in every store,” Oyefeso told Gizmodo. “Any lawmaker that is serious about cutting costs for hardworking families must support a ban on electronic shelf labels and surveillance pricing in grocery stores.”
At least a dozen states are currently considering legislation that would regulate surveillance pricing, with Maryland recently passing the first law banning the practice at grocery stores. But activists have spoken out about that law and worry that it has way too many loopholes.
Last Saturday, Nasire Best, a 21-year-old man from Maryland, approached a White House checkpoint near 17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue NW shortly after 6 p.m. ET, pulled a gun from a bag, and opened fire on Secret Service officers. Officers returned fire, striking Best, who was taken to a hospital and later died.
According to a July 2025 D.C. Superior Court filing, Best was previously “known to the United States Secret Service” around the White House complex. According to the court filing, Best walked into a restricted area at a White House pedestrian access control post, ignored commands to stop, and “claimed he was Jesus Christ and that he wanted to get arrested.” He was arrested on an unlawful entry charge in that incident.
The filing said Best interacted with the Secret Service, walking around the White House complex and asking how to gain access at various entry posts. It also said he had been involuntarily committed in June 2025 after obstructing vehicle entry to the White House complex. (snip-MORE)
There are over 5,381 data centers in the United States, which is more than the rest of the planet. And the state with the most data centers is Virginia. Oddly enough, my voice dictation wrote “data sinners” instead of “data centers.” That’s not far off.
Data centers pollute and are bad for the environment. They drain water resources. They raise energy costs for the average consumer. They bring noise pollution. They occupy vast amounts of land. A single hyperscale data center can consume as much electricity as 100,000 homes. And city governments love them because they bring in revenue. What they don’t bring are a large number of jobs.
In Virginia, the General Assembly is threatened with a government shutdown over tax breaks for data centers. The state offers over $2 billion in tax breaks to these technological warehouses, and some senators believe that they don’t need them. They don’t. Even though most positive spin and gaslighting for data centers comes from right-wing think tanks like the Goldwater Institute (which is like arguing why you want a nuclear power plant in your backyard), the argument in the Virginia General Assembly isn’t partisan. Democrats are in control, and they’re arguing about this with themselves. (snip-MORE)
I have been drawing cartoons about Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton since at least 2020, as you can see here, when he filed a lawsuit challenging Pennsylvania’s electoral vote for Joe Biden. Did I mention that he’s the Attorney General for Texas, not Pennsylvania?
I did a cartoon about him in 2022 when he hid behind his wife from process servers. The reason he’s being served so much is that he is a criminal. Of course, this was before he was caught cheating on his wife.
One of my favorite cartoons about Paxton was drawn during his impeachment trial in 2023. Yes, he was impeached because of his corruption, but the Texas Senate saved his tiny corrupt balls. The party that impeached him was his own, Republicans. (snip-MORE)
We have 29 more days to make our views known in regard to the executive wishing all federal workers to sign a very broad NDA. This will crush transparency and notice of abuse, and there will likely be no more whistleblowing.
Anyway, here it is, along with the link so we can make our comments (of course it is not hyperlinked on the page, we need to copy it and paste it into our browser. WP has made it a live link in this post, but it doesn’t work.) It’s our duty and a right we still have; if we do not use it, we will most certainly use it. I found out about this yesterday on MPS’s post; it just took me a bit to get to this.
You can find this here. (This hyperlink is good; I made it myself and it works.) It is a .pdf.The NDA notice begins in the lower right-hand column.
From within the public notice, here is the info for submitting our comments:
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments using the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for sending comments. The general policy for comments and other submissions from members of the public is to make these submissions available for public viewing at https:// http://www.regulations.gov without change, and including any personal identifiers or contact information. Before finalizing the NDA, OPM will consider all comments received on or before the closing date for comments. OPM may make changes to the NDA after considering the comments received.
And a little more:
Request for Comment OPM welcomes public comments on all aspects of the draft NDA, including whether the Privacy Act statement’s description of the authority, principal purposes, routine uses, and effects provide sufficient notice to employees. The draft NDA is available in the docket for this notice on regulations.gov. See https://www.regulations.gov/document/ OPM-2026-0100-0003. OPM specifically requests comment on the following issues.
What scope of information should be covered by the NDA? Should it cover only unclassified information? How do you understand the terms confidential and confidentiality in the context of this NDA? What customization of the NDA, if any, may be necessary for agencies to ensure it covers the appropriate information?
Does the NDA clearly communicate the types of information that would be subject to non-disclosure requirements? If not, how could OPM better describe what information can or cannot be disclosed to ensure employees have appropriate notice of their responsibilities?
Are there other statutes to which OPM should cite in Appendix A of the NDA when describing the nondisclosure requirements applicable to individuals working for or on behalf of the Federal government?
Do you have suggestions regarding the layout or formatting of the NDA?
Does the Privacy Act statement in the NDA provide sufficient notice to employees of the authorities, principal purposes, routine uses, and effects of
the form?
Does the OPM/GOVT–1 system of records notice provide sufficient notice that the government-wide system of records would maintain records related to the signing of, or failure to sign, the NDA?
What are the appropriate actions, if any, for agencies to consider taking if existing employees choose not to sign the NDA?
What are the appropriate actions, if any, for agencies to consider taking if new employees choose not to sign the NDA?
Does the NDA clearly communicate the potential consequences of refusal to sign the form for both existing and new employees, along with whether signing the form is voluntary or mandatory?
What else should OPM consider with regard to the NDA?? OPM will consider comments received before finalizing the NDA.
There are several other things there, if you have some time and want to see what the exec is doing besides trying to hide all they do and finally/fully cut off our representation, even as we are taxed for government work. I don’t believe we can let this slide, but maybe that’s only me. Anyway, if you also don’t like this, please go, read the bit, and write what your conscience tells you. I’m certain you will not be alone in doing so.The thing is, our government, for which we all pay, is not a business. The only parts that should not be public are those that actually shield the actual security of the country, things such as when we go after Osama Bin Laden, and locations of items that other countries might like to drone. There should be no covering of regular day-to-day government business-that is our business and we have the right to know.
Trumpeter Robyn Steward thought clubs weren’t for her until she encountered Fabric’s accessible upgrade – the new home for her radically inclusive, space-themed night
Working the crowd … Robyn playing at one of her Robyn’s Rocket nights at Fabric. Photograph: Siân O’Connor
Until May last year, trumpeter Robyn Steward had never been in a nightclub space, save for playing trumpet with Lancaster duo the Lovely Eggs at London’s Heaven, and a few nights in a university hall that doubled as a lunch room. Steward is autistic and has multiple disabilities including cerebral palsy. “Sometimes strobes can trigger migraines for me, or feel overwhelming,” she says. “I feel like my body’s a bit lost.”
When she wanted to see a gig at Fabric nightclub in London, she asked a friend to go with her as a carer. “I was amazed at how accessible it was,” she says. Subtle touches integrate multiple access needs into the space. “The mezzanine level meant that I didn’t have the strobes in my face. There was a rail that I could hold on to, and there was seating opposite the balcony so I could sit and watch the gig.” She also noticed Fabric’s recently upgraded sensory dancefloor, which deliberately transforms sound into tactile vibrations to better cater for the hearing impaired. “I could see that the lights were strobing and everything, but I felt safe,” Steward says.
Inspired, she contacted Fabric to see if they might host her long-running, space-themed experimental music night Robyn’s Rocket, which since 2017 has been booking noise bands, DJs and improv groups in London venues from Deptford to Dalston. While it champions disabled and autistic performers and audiences, Robyn’s Rocket is principally about integration. “People with and without learning disabilities – and autistic and non-autistic people – should spend time together, where there isn’t any kind of power dynamic,” she says. Her aim is to create a space “where people are all just having a really nice time together”.
We meet in a music studio in Deptford, south London, the day before the Rocket’s first night at Fabric. Steward, 39, is relentlessly upbeat; straight after the interview, she heads to the shops where a friend helps her figure out an unspecific drinks rider request. It’s in keeping with the Rocket spirit of clarifying what might usually be assumed or implied. Online, she supplies detailed visual storyboards of how an evening will progress. All artists fill out detailed tech and access riders. Every box and cable is given a name, shape or colour. All Rocket gigs are livestreamed and timings are strictly adhered to so those streaming the gig don’t get lost. “The schedule, once it’s agreed, it’s pretty non-negotiable,” Steward says.
On arrival, everyone is presented with a silver rocket-shaped badge, angled up, across or down as a visual barometer of how much communication they’re comfortable with. Fabric is adorned with more than 100 posters: signposts always feature words and shapes and are populated with cartoon characters, human and alien. Silver foil covers the stage, and live projections from visual artist Rucksack Cinema are suitably astral. “You’re into new planets, are you?” crows the frontman of “cosmic dross” band Henge.
For Steward, the space theme is also about imagining an equitable new world. “You might meet somebody here with a learning disability, or an autistic person. You might not. But everyone is equal in this space.” The Robyn’s Rocket nights echo the aesthetic and political spirit of Afro-futurist jazz visionary Sun Ra and his Arkestra. “The idea that you can create a different dimension, almost a different planetary experience, at these events is very consistent,” says Mark Williams, co-founder of the Deptford-based arts charity Heart N Soul (where Steward is an associate artist). “It’s using imagination and creativity to free people, and to exist on a different kind of plane.”
Steward was born in Suffolk, and took to music when a tutor brought instruments to her primary school: “I really wanted to go on the trumpet, but they ran out of time, so I spent a whole week blowing raspberries.” The tutor returned for an assembly the next week, and Steward immediately requested the trumpet. “I played a clear note straight away.”
As an infant, Steward used Makaton (a language that uses a combination of signs, symbols and speech) to communicate until she attended Musical Keys, a group for children with special needs, aged three: “It was song based, and so I learned to speak that way – there was a lot of repetition.” Once she learned to speak, she wouldn’t stop; her parents got her a Dictaphone for long car journeys: “They’d say, ‘You can talk to this Dictaphone as much as you want, but leave us alone in the front.’ I would make my own radio shows that would come out sounding like Alan Partridge’s Knowing Me, Knowing You.”
Unlike her East Anglian counterpart, Steward is an excellent, direct communicator. The first half of her career was spent delivering autism training, speaking at conferences, and in research. She’s also written books such as The Autism-Friendly Guide to Self Employment. But, by age 30, Steward became “very conscious that I needed to think about what I want to spend the rest of my life doing”. She had recently learned to improvise on trumpet through the big band at a local adult education centre, and seeing a gig by trumpeter Andy Diagram (who plays the trumpet with guitar pedals) proved crucial to developing her own art. With the help of Heart N Soul, she built Robyn’s Rocket up from a small residency in Deptford to a regular slot at Cafe Oto in east London, later inviting musicians including Alabaster DePlume, Coby Sey and Mica Levi to perform.
The vocalist Seaming To played a Rocket night in 2024. “More and more friends of mine are realising that they have neurodivergent aspects,” Seaming To says. “And quite a lot of them find it really awkward coming out to noisy places. At Robyn’s night, you can admit to feeling awkward, and it’s all acceptable.”
On the night, Steward dons her trademark purple fedora and doubles up as space trumpeter and energetic MC. “I’ve done this gig partly because I just wanted to put Henge on,” she says, beaming from the stage. For all the very human practicalities of Robyn’s Rocket, Steward still has celestial ambitions. “And why wouldn’t you want to put them on in a homemade spaceship?”
On Tuesday, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows ruled that a proposed ballot initiative banning trans students from school sports and bathrooms will not appear before voters this November. The billionaire-funded campaign initially submitted 79,692 signatures—well over the 67,682 required to qualify—and the Secretary of State’s office certified the question for the ballot in March. But indications soon emerged that the signature-gathering process was riddled with improper procedures and, in at least one documented case and potentially many others, outright forgery. After a court remand, an evidentiary hearing, and a sworn-testimony review of the petitions, 12,542 signatures were invalidated, leaving the campaign 532 short of the threshold. Barring an appeal—which is likely though its success is far from certain—transgender students in Maine can rest a little easier this election cycle.
The infractions are striking. One out-of-state circulator left his petition forms unattended at a Topsham polling place on Election Day—twice—allowing voters to sign without a witness present, in direct violation of Maine law. Another circulator did the same at a Saco polling place, leaving her table for extended periods while crowds of voters signed unwitnessed petitions. When asked under oath whether she had destroyed the unwitnessed forms as required, she said yes—but a photograph submitted into evidence showed one of those forms was in fact turned in for validation. Most troubling of all, an out-of-state signature gatherer paid per signature submitted forms that appear to contain outright forgeries: one voter listed on her petition testified under oath that she had never signed it and had never even heard of the initiative. After the Oxford town clerk flagged additional suspicious signatures, an Elections Division review compared every name on the circulator’s forms against voter registration applications—and concluded that every single one of her validated signatures should have been thrown out as signed by another person.
Based on the evidence, Bellows ruled Tuesday that the initiative had failed to qualify for the November ballot. The decision marked a reversal of her own March certification, when her office initially determined that the petition contained enough valid signatures to move forward. That earlier ruling was challenged in Cumberland County Superior Court by three Maine voters, who alleged that thousands of signatures had been collected in violation of state law. In April, Justice Deborah Cashman agreed that the original review had been incomplete and remanded the case back to the Secretary of State’s office for further factfinding, ordering a new determination of validity within thirty days. That process produced the May 12 evidentiary hearing—where witnesses, including town clerks and voters whose names appeared on petitions, testified under oath—and ultimately the decision invalidating thousands more signatures than the initial review had caught. Bellows adopted that recommendation in full.
The initiative would have done far more than what its sports-focused branding suggested. It would have defined a person’s sex for school purposes as “a person’s biological status as male or female recorded at birth on the person’s original birth certificate”—a definition that would have stripped transgender students of legal recognition in Maine schools. It would have required public schools to “maintain separate restrooms, locker rooms, shower rooms, and other private spaces for each sex,” extending the ban well beyond athletics and into every gendered space in a school building. It would have created a private right of action allowing any student to sue their school for “direct injury” suffered from a violation of the act, effectively turning every transgender student’s presence in a bathroom or on a sports team into potential litigation. And it would have specifically carved transgender students out of the Maine Human Rights Act.
The anti-trans signature drive was not a grassroots effort. It was bankrolled by Illinois billionaire Richard Uihlein, the co-founder of Uline office supplies, who donated $800,000 to fund the entire effort. Uihlein has given more than $250 million to political causes since 2016, and is a major funder of the American Principles Project, which routinely spends tens of millions on anti-trans campaign ads during election years. He is not alone: an independent analysis published by Atmos and HEATED found that 80% of 45 major anti-trans organizations in the U.S. have received funding from fossil fuel companies or billionaires. The Maine initiative was part of that broader pattern—an attempt by a small handful of extraordinarily wealthy donors to use direct democracy as a workaround in states where elected legislatures have refused to engage in anti-trans legislation.
The decision was greeted with relief by the LGBTQ+ coalition that has fought the initiative since the day it was filed. “Maine has strict rules in place to protect the integrity of our elections and our system of direct democracy. The paid, out-of-state signature gathers and the billionaire who paid to try to put this question on the ballot failed to follow the rules,” said David Farmer, campaign manager for the Campaign for Free and Fair Schools, the coalition led by EqualityMaine, GLAD Law, and the Maine Women’s Lobby. “We believe that the appeals process and the reviews by the Secretary of State are working as the law intends. They are protecting the integrity of our elections.”
The Maine ruling is not the end of fight. Similar billionaire-backed initiatives have been certified for the November ballot in Washington and Colorado, where voters will decide whether to bar transgender students from sports as well as medical care restrictions. Both efforts are also funded by conservative megadonors, and both are part of the same strategy that produced the Maine initiative: use ballot initiatives to roll back trans rights in states whose elected legislatures have refused to do so. The Maine anti-trans campaign is expected appeal Bellows’ decision to Maine Superior Court within the ten-day window the law allows.
Scottie's Playtime 
