A Congressional subcommittee is set to hold a hearing into UFOs, which are also referred to as unidentified anomalous phenomena (UAP). The panel will hear "firsthand accounts" of UAP and "assess the federal government’s transparency and accountability" regarding possible threats to national security. You'll be able to watch the hearing below on July 26th at 10AM ET.

The hearing — conducted by the Subcommittee on National Security, the Border and Foreign Affairs — will also focus on drives for legislation to "bring transparency to UAPs." The subcommittee wants to force the federal government to provide US residents with "information about potential risks to public safety and national security" as well. According to Rep. Tim Burchett, “The Pentagon and Washington bureaucrats have kept this information hidden for decades and we’re finally going to shed some light on it."

The federal government has placed more of an onus on UAPs over the last few years (publicly, at least). In 2021, the Pentagon set up a task force to look into UAP sightings while NASA has established a separate panel to investigate the phenomena. The Department of Defense also created its own UAP investigative body, the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), in 2022.

Among the three witnesses who will testify during the hearing is David Grusch. The former intelligence official recently claimed that the US government has been recovering alien spacecraft and the bodies of UAP pilots for decades. Grusch, who until July 2022 was the co-lead for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency's UAP analysis, also said there was evidence of "malevolent activity" by UFOs. His claims, for which he has not provided any physical evidence, led to the hearing.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has proposed a formal ban on fake reviews and testimonials. Companies would also be prohibited from using phony followers and views to inflate their social media metrics if the rule takes effect as it stands.

This isn't the first time the agency has trained its sights on fake reviews. In its first such case in 2019, it fined a third-party Amazon seller for paying for fake reviews (Amazon itself has sued phony review providers). Earlier this year, the FTC levied a $600,000 penalty against the owner of a vitamin brand for “review hijacking" on Amazon.

The new rule, which the agency said it was working on in October, is close to being finalized and it includes steep penalties for those caught peddling fake reviews and testimonials. As The Washington Post points out, the FTC plans to slap businesses that "buy, sell and manipulate online reviews" up to $50,000. Not only is that fine for each phony review, it's also for every time a consumer sees it. So, if the FTC finds out that one fake review has been viewed just 20 times, the business that bought it could be on the hook for $1 million.

“Our proposed rule on fake reviews shows that we’re using all available means to attack deceptive advertising in the digital age,” Samuel Levine, the director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement. “The rule would trigger civil penalties for violators and should help level the playing field for honest companies.”

Explicitly, the FTC aims to ban "businesses from writing or selling consumer reviews or testimonials by someone who does not exist, who did not have experience with the product or service, or who misrepresented their experiences." Similarly, companies won't be allowed to obtain or disseminate reviews and testimonials that they "knew or should have known that they were fake or false."

Repurposing an existing review to make it appear that it was written for a different product (i.e. review hijacking) will be outlawed, as will offering payments or other kinds of compensation for positive or negative reviews. The FTC says companies can still ask users to leave a review, as that's an important way for small businesses to enhance their reputations.

Managers and officers won't be allowed to post reviews of their company's products without clear disclosures and nor can they ask family members or employees to do so in certain circumstances. Under the proposed rule, companies won't be allowed to run websites that claim to offer independent reviews of categories of products and services that include their own offerings.

Review suppression will be banned as well. Companies won't be allowed to use intimidation tactics, such as legal threats and false accusations, to push customers to remove or avoid leaving a negative review.

In addition, the FTC seeks to ban companies from using fake followers and views to fluff up their social media numbers. "The proposed rule also would bar anyone from buying such indicators to misrepresent their importance for a commercial purpose," the agency said. This is a provision that could have far-reaching consequences beyond commerce — influencers may have to ensure they don't factor in bots when they try to secure brand deals.

Meanwhile, the proposed notice for the rule takes note of the popularity of generative AI. "It has been reported that an AI chatbot is being used to create fake reviews," it reads. "As the reporting notes, the widespread emergence of AI chatbots is likely to make it easier for bad actors to write fake reviews."

The rule won't take effect immediately. It will be open to public comments for a 60-day period, after which the agency will consider changes before finalizing the directive.

A lot of these provisions make sense. In essence, the FTC is trying to ensure that businesses and brands are transparent and honest with consumers. Actually enforcing these measures, however, is a different matter. The agency told the Post that it won't be getting extra resources to tackle purveyors of fake reviews, but a codified rule can strengthen its hand in court. Taking on companies based overseas that sell and post phony reviews might be a difficult task too. Still, a formal ban on these practices and the threat of eye-popping fines may be enough to deter some companies from using fake reviews.

If younger generations are more likely to feel the effects of climate change, shouldn't they have a say in related government policies? The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) thinks so. It's officially forming its "first-ever" National Environmental Youth Advisory Council. The agency is inviting 16 people aged 18 to 29 to have them influence the agency's approach to environmental issues that affect youth communities.

In keeping with the EPA's increasing focus on environmental justice, at least half of the council's overall membership will come from, live in or do most of its work in "disadvantaged" communities where clean air, land and water aren't guaranteed. Youth interested in the panel will have until August 22nd at 11:59PM Eastern to apply, with webinars for would-be applicants on June 30th and August 7th.

Agency head Michael Regan argues that it's not practical to address environmental issues without the help of younger people who are often at the "forefront of social movements." The council makes sure that youth play a role in decisions, the administrator adds.

Plans for the council were originally unveiled in June 2022, and come several months after the EPA created an Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights. That new division is meant to include "underserved communities" in the regulatory process, Vice President Kamala Harris said at the time. In that light, the youth council is an extension of last year's strategy.

President Biden's administration has made the environment a key element of its policy. The wide-ranging Inflation Reduction Act includes $3 billion in environmental justice grants as well as revised (if sometimes stricter) EV tax credits. The youth council won't necessarily lead to major changes in policy, but it makes sense when young adults are more likely to deal with the most severe effects of rising global temperatures than the official rule makers.

Doing your taxes in the United States can be famously convoluted. It can also be expensive: on top of paying their tax bills, Americans who have more complicated finances often have to pay for software to help them navigate the US tax code. That might change soon: a report from the Washington Post says that the Internal Revenue Services is preparing to roll out a free direct filing system that will allow Americans to complete their taxes digitally.

The first version of the direct filing system could be available as soon as next year, according to the report, with a pilot program launching for a small group of taxpayers in January of 2024. That would arrive just a year after the IRS publicly started exploring the option, when the tax agency tapped the New America think tank to help explore the feasibility of an agency-run filing program. That effort was kicked off in February of this year, after the Inflation Reduction Act earmarked $15 million to the IRS to research a "multi-lingual and mobile-friendly" free direct e-file system.

That focus on a user-friendly system might be the point. The IRS already offers a Free File Online tool, but according to the Government Accountability Offices, it's used by less than 3% of eligible taxpayers. If the program is a success, it could make filing taxes easier and more affordable for millions of Americans. If not? Well, TurboTax and H&R Block probably aren't going anywhere. After all, the US tax prep and filing industry is still worth about $14 billion.

After a string of delays and a scrubbed launch attempt, SpaceX finally conducted the first test flight of its Starship spacecraft earlier this month. While the vehicle got off the ground, it seems federal agencies will be dealing with the explosive fallout of the mission for quite some time.

Federal agencies say the launch led to a 3.5-acre fire on state park land. The blaze was extinguished. Debris from the rocket, which SpaceX said it had to blow up in the sky for safety reasons after a separation failure, was found across hundreds of acres of land. “Although no debris was documented on refuge fee-owned lands, staff documented approximately 385 acres of debris on SpaceX’s facility and at Boca Chica State Park,” the Texas arm of the US Fish and Wildlife Service told Bloomberg.

The agency noted it hasn’t found evidence of dead wildlife as a result of the incident. Still, it’s working with the Federal Aviation Administration on a site assessment and post-launch recommendations, while ensuring compliance with the Endangered Species Act.

Soon after the launch and Starship’s explosion, the FAA said it was carrying out a mishap investigation. Starship is grounded for now and its return to flight depends on the agency “determining that any system, process or procedure related to the mishap does not affect public safety.”

Starship’s approved launch plan included an anomaly response process, which the FAA says was triggered after the spacecraft blew up. As such, SpaceX is required to remove debris from sensitive habitats, carry out a survey of wildlife and vegetation and send reports to several federal agencies. “The FAA will ensure SpaceX complies with all required mitigations,” the agency told Bloomberg.

Even if SpaceX can sate federal agencies' concerns swiftly, it may be quite some time until the next Starship launch. The super heavy-lift space launch vehicle destroyed its launch pad, sending chunks of debris into the air. Footage showed the shrapnel landing on a nearby beach and even hitting a van hundreds of yards from the launch site. Fortunately, no one was hurt, according to the FAA.

Don't worry if the lack of a federal tax credit put you off from buying certain Tesla Model Y variants or other EVs — they might now qualify. The Treasury Department has revised its classification standard to treat more vehicles as SUVs rather than sedans, raising the price threshold from $55,000 to $80,000 and making more EVs eligible for the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) full $7,500 credit under the Inflation Reduction Act. As Autoblogexplains, that should cover five-seat versions of the Model Y (only seven-seaters qualified before) as well as the Cadillac Lyriq, Ford Mustang Mach-E, Ford Escape Plug-in Hybrid and VW ID.4.

The Treasury expanded the classification by using the Environmental Protection Agency's public-oriented Fuel Economy Labeling standard rather than the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE). This will help treat crossovers "consistently," the department says. This also helps the credit classifications line up with what you see both on the car label and the US government's FuelEconomy.gov website.

You can claim the full amount for any qualifying EV bought and put into service in 2023, including those that weren't eligible under the CAFE standard. Any vehicle that could receive the credit before will still pass muster, the Treasury says.

The change of heart comes after the IRS invited public comments on a proposed change. Tesla chief Elon Musk encouraged input from his Twitter followers soon afterward. It's unclear how much of a role Tesla's fanbase played, but the decision isn't surprising. Under the old criteria, some of the best-known EVs didn't qualify. The credits were meant to spur EV adoption and further the Biden administration's climate goals — that was going to be harder if customers couldn't get deals on the most popular models.

NASA is going back to an old idea as it tries to get humans to Mars. It is teaming up with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to test a nuclear thermal rocket engine in space with the aim of using the technology for crewed missions to the red planet. The agencies hope to "demonstrate advanced nuclear thermal propulsion technology as soon as 2027," NASA administrator Bill Nelson said. "With the help of this new technology, astronauts could journey to and from deep space faster than ever — a major capability to prepare for crewed missions to Mars."

Under the Demonstration Rocket for Agile Cislunar Operations (DRACO) program, NASA's Space Technology Mission Directorate will take the lead on technical development of the engine, which will be integrated with an experimental spacecraft from DARPA. NASA says that nuclear thermal propulsion (NTP) could allow spacecraft to travel faster, which could reduce the volume of supplies needed to carry out a long mission. An NTD engine could also free up space for more science equipment and extra power for instrumentation and communication.

As far back as the 1940s, scientists started speculating about the possibility of using nuclear energy to power spaceflight. The US conducted ground experiments on that front starting in the '50s. Budget cutbacks and changing priorities (such as a focus on the Space Shuttle program) led to NASA abandoning the project at the end of 1972 before it carried out any test flights.

There are, of course, risks involved with NTP engines, such as the possible dispersal of radioactive material in the environment should a failure occur in the atmosphere or orbit. Nevertheless, NASA says the faster transit times that NTP engines can enable could lower the risk to astronauts — they could reduce travel times to Mars by up to a quarter. Nuclear thermal rockets could be at least three times more efficient than conventional chemical propulsion methods.

NASA is also looking into nuclear energy to power related space exploration efforts. In 2018, it carried out tests of a portable nuclear reactor as part of efforts to develop a system capable of powering a habitat on Mars. Last year, NASA and the Department of Energy selected three contractors to design a fission surface power system that it can test on the Moon. DARPA and the Defense Department have worked on other NTP engine projects over the last few years.

Meanwhile, the US has just approved a small modular nuclear design for the first time. As Gizmodo reports, the design allows for a nuclear facility that's around a third the size of a standard reactor. Each module is capable of producing around 50 megawatts of power. The design, from a company called NuScale, could lower the cost and complexity of building nuclear power plants.

The Biden administration is reportedly drafting an executive order designed to modernize federal space regulations. According to Reuters, White House officials have hosted multiple “listening sessions” since November 14th. The goal of those meetings has been to hear from private space companies and the rules they would like to see introduced.

Reuters reports the White House wants to simplify licensing and approval procedures for more routine space activities, including things like rocket launches and satellite deployments. Among the measures the Biden administration is considering is an order that would task the Department of Commerce with creating an online tool that would guide companies through the licensing requirements from each federal agency. The team drafting the order is also looking for ways to push Congress to give certain federal agencies oversight of space activities that aren’t covered by current laws, including things like asteroid mining and space junk removal. The order could be ready for President Biden to sign by early next year.

The administration’s push to streamline space regulations comes as companies like Blue Origin prepare to spend billions on projects like Orbital Reef, a space station the firm hopes to start assembling in low Earth orbit by the end of the decade. The next decade is also likely to see a new space race between the US and China play out as the rival superpowers look to put humans back on the Moon. Private space firms are likely to be critical in the outcome of that conflict.

Last year, the Biden administration signed the Secure Equipment Act into law, which aimed to block the authorization of network licenses from several Chinese companies whose hardware has been deemed a national security threat. Today, the FCC announced that it's officially implementing that ruling, which means some future equipment from Huawei, ZTE, Hytera, Hikvision and Dahua won't be authorized for sale in the US. Existing equipment from those companies, which are all listed under the FCC's "Covered List," aren't affected by the law.

“The FCC is committed to protecting our national security by ensuring that untrustworthy communications equipment is not authorized for use within our borders, and we are continuing that work here,” FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said in a statement. “These new rules are an important part of our ongoing actions to protect the American people from national security threats involving telecommunications.”

To be clear, the FCC isn't completely blocking all hardware from these companies. And for some, like Hytera, Hikvision and Dahua, Rosenworcel writes that it's specifically focusing on gear related to "the purpose of public safety, security of government facilities, physical surveillance of critical infrastructure, and other national security purposes." If those companies can show that they're not marketing that equipment for government use — for example, directing it consumers instead — they may be able get authorized by the FCC.

This latest move follows years of conflict between the US and companies closely tied to Chinese governments. That's included placing several notable Chinese companies, including DJI, on the Department of Commerce's "Entity List," which prohibits US firms from selling equipment to them. The FCC is also calling for $5 billion to help US carriers with the massive task of replacing equipment from Huawei and ZTE.

As recently as early last year, the Federal Bureau of Investigation was considering using NSO Group’s infamous Pegasus spyware in criminal investigations, reports The New York Times. Between late 2020 and early 2021, agency officials were in the “advanced” stages of developing plans to brief FBI leadership on the software, according to internal bureau documents and court records seen by The Times. Those documents also reveal the bureau had developed guidelines for federal prosecutors detailing how the FBI’s use of Pegasus would need to be disclosed during court cases.

Based on the documents, it’s unclear if the FBI had considered using the spyware against American citizens. Earlier this year, The Times found that the agency had tested Phantom, a version of Pegasus that can target phones with US numbers.

By July 2021, the FBI eventually decided not to use Pegasus in criminal investigations. That’s the same month that The Washington Post published an investigation that claimed the software had been used to compromise the phones of two women close to murdered Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. A few months later, the US placed Pegasus creator NSO Group on the Commerce Department’s entity list, a designation that prevents US companies from conducting business with the firm. Despite the decision not to use Pegasus, the FBI indicated it remains open to using spyware in the future.

“Just because the FBI ultimately decided not to deploy the tool in support of criminal investigations does not mean it would not test, evaluate and potentially deploy other similar tools for gaining access to encrypted communications used by criminals,” states a legal briefing filed by the FBI last month.

The documents appear to present a different picture of the agency’s interest in Pegasus than the one FBI Director Chris Wray shared with Congress during a closed-doors hearing this past December. “If you mean have we used it in any of our investigations to collect or target somebody, the answer is - as I’m assured - no,” he said in response to a question from Senator Ron Wyden. “The reason why I hedge, and I want to be transparent, that we have acquired some of their tools for research and development. In other words, to be able to figure out how bad guys could use it, for example.”